"Recreating British light infantry battalion look on tabletop" Topic

Do gamers here prefer these AWI british light "units" to be several stands of different headgear and/or facings, or do they prefer just one look of headgear and facings throughout the unit?

Mine are in one headgear but different facings to partially replicate their original units.

Jim

I paint my light infantry and grenadiers as part of their regiment and then create my elite battalions. Length of jacket, wings and headgear are not rigorously applied.

So if you are recreating General Howe's Light infantry Battalions of 1776, 1777, and likely Clinton's Lights at Monmouth, they wore no facings. Instead they wore round about coats, either purpose made, modified waistcoats. So the facing colors would likely only be seen on cuffs, wings, etc.

And yes, mine having regimental distinctions. Round hats too.

Mine represent the British light battalion in the south. In 1779-80 that would mean either a mix of highland light infantry companies and loyalist center companies or a mix of highland light infantry companies, the light company of the 16th and one or more loyalist center or light companies. When the 16th is included I model them after the Troiani painting. So I will have either two or three different looking sets of figures making up my light battalion.

Wait, people model:

1.Separate Loyalist light infantry companies?

2. Mix Loyalist light infantry companies with British regular army light infantry companies?

I don't think the Loyalist units were mixed with the regulars. The lights in the south were from several different regular formations.

I am only as good as my sources VT, but that's what they say. Remember though for much of the southern campaign there were only two or three companies of regular light infantry.

I think maybe at Eutaw Springs, but I don't believe the Lights that ended up at Yorktown were mixed with Loyalist Lights.

Historygamer, the force I am talking about consisted of, according to one source, two combined battalions each containing a company of light infantry from the 71st and loyalist center companies that Campbell brought with him from New York when he invaded Georgia. Before the Siege of Savannah it was shrunk to a single battalion and around that time the light company of the 16th that Prevost had brought with him from Georgia joined it. OOBs I've seen have these three regular light infantry companies teamed up with different companies of Loyalists in 1780 and it was destroyed at Cowpens in 1781.

Correct. The Crown Light battalion at Cowpens was made up of the 16th Light company, as well as both Light companies of the 71st, and the Light company of the Prince of Wales Loyalist regiment.

It was a rather small battalion, only totalling about 150 men, meaning the four companies were pretty small.

If painting the Prince of Wales Lights, there is some uncertainty whether their facings were blue or green. More likely blue.

No one seems to make up a unit where every stand has completely different caps from every other stand in the unit?

I think I am just going to do up an entire unit of 23rd fusilier lights bc i like the cap. Or maybe two stands of each fusilier unit's caps (5th and 23rd)

Not quite sure what you mean. Fusiliers did not wear their beaten in caps in the field. They were the property of the colonel and he put them into storage.

Unless doing the Boston look at all Light troops went to wearing round hats, not their expensive Light caps.

But, but your troops, I do as you like. :-)

Did British lights in laced jackets with facings and wings also wear the "pimp" hats? I am not interested in roundabout jackets.

Unless doing the Boston look at all Light troops went to wearing round hats, not their expensive Light caps.

I understand this is true for the light companies under Howe in the middle colonies. Did this practice automatically continue under Clinton? I have seen some suggest that light companies may have adopted later in the war a collapsible leather cap similar to what the Queens Rangers wore. Also what about those regiments in Canada and Florida that didn't serve under Howe? And what about the Highland light infantry companies?

My light battalions have mixed hats (a stand of 4 is all the same) and that is primarily a function of the miniatures in my collection. However, when I finally buy some lights from perry, with a choice of hats, I will probably opt for variety from stand (of 4) to stand.

Likely the changes continued for the main army, at least through Monmouth, with the exception of grenadiers who reported!y put their caps into storage in favor of a round hat, likely with a white feather.

My understanding is that there is less certainty what occurred after Clinton settled into NY, though they likely continued for the grand forage in September. Obviously a significant portion of the NY army shipped out to the Caribbean.

I do know that the Admiralty continued to ship linen to the marines to make overalls, so that changed likely stayed.

In regards to Highlander grenadiers, they followed the others putting away their caps before the 1778 campaign, reverting to the standard highland hat wear with a white feather, if not before.

The Highland lights wore same hat, with appropriate feathers. Both grens and lights also had other uniform features that distinguished them to their status.

Remember, the caps of the grenadiers and lights were the personal property of the colonel, unlike the center company hats. After some point, the colonels did not want to spend the money to replace them each year.

According to historian Eric Schnitzer, all troops part of the Canadian command modified their kits in the Burgoyne fashion, I believe for the duration of the war. I am less certain about the Kings 8th which garrisoned the frontier forts.

The southern commands were separate, though at some point troops were shifted from the north to the south, likely taking their fashions with them. Anyone who has worn a cocked hat can tell you that unmodified it is not much use against Sun or rain.

I believe that of the Highland corps, we only have a hint from very late of the 71st's flank coys wearing bonnets with distinguishing feathers, white for the grenadiers and red for the lights (allegedly ordered by Col John Maitland)

The portrait we have of Lt James Stewart of the 42nd Light coy shows no distinguishing feather on his officers bonnet.

I believe Troiani shows some Highland flank companies with appropriate feathers.

I believe Troiani shows a grenadier of the 42nd with a white feather attached to his bonnet, ca 1780 if I remember correctly. There is the Dec 1778 letter from an officer attached to the single grenadier coy in NY who recounts that "The Light Infantry wear a green feather in their Caps & we the 
Grenadiers a White one in our Hatts." (Francis Laye, Royal Artillery). We might extrapolate the flanks coys of the Highland corps wearing the distinctions as described, but perhaps in Highland military bonnets.

A late but authoritative Black Watch source recounts that grenadiers wore white feathers, the 1st LI green feathers and the 2nd LI red, all in the context of the 42nd, on being assigned to Cornwallis' Reserve, being ordered to wear red feathers by General Howe,

The source from 1822 is somewhat opaque in terms of the timeline and the rationale but we might once again extrapolate that the Black Watch flankers would have worn the flank battalion distinctions as described. There is no reference to the headgear.

I thought the 2nd Lights wore green?

Well, the trsdition is, of course, that the 2nd Light Infantry adopted a red feather after the attack on Wayne's men near Paoli Tavern, as a reponse to the threats from the other side that those responsible for the so-called 'massacre' could expect no quarter in future encounters. The red feather would enable the enemy to know who to look for. This runs parallel to the 2nd LI being dubbed 'The Bloodhounds.'

That story only emerged fully in 1851, in relation to a red feather worn by the 46th Regt light company first mentioned in 1833. It seems to be accepted that the story as told lacks convincing detail and does not stand up to scrutiny.

There are various other versions dating from 1822 relating to the 71st (possibly in connection with the 'Baylor massacre' attack on at Old Tappan in 1778), the stories even more lacking in convincing detail.

1822 was also the year that retired Black Watch officer, and AWI veteran, Maj. Gen. James Stirling wrote in relation to the 'red feather' of the 42nd RH:

"The origin of their wearing this feather commenced early in the American War of 1776 when the regiment was Brigaded with the Grenadiers and Light Infantry of the Army under the command of the late Marquis Cornwallis- at this period there were no regulation feathers – the grenadiers wore White Feathers, the first battalion Light Infantry wore Green,- the 2nd Light Infantry wore Red, and to make the whole uniform General Sir William Howe, then Commander- in-Chief, ordered the 42nd to get red feathers which they have wore [sic] ever since."

There are a number of problems with the details of that statement also, but relative to the distinguishing colours of respective 'flank' battalions, it conforms to the pattern we might expect and, while late, is written by an eye-witness who still seems to have had his wits sbout him.

The Stirling letter, (which came to light in the 1960s and was only published in 1982) the Laye letter of 1778 and the clothing acccount of the 71st from 1783 are, as far as I am aware, the only first-hand references to flank battalion distinctions from the AWI period.

Ref. colour of distinguishing colours:
Grenadiers1776-?83: white
1st LI 1776-78; The Light Infantry battalion 1778-80; green
2nd LI 1776-78: red
(+ 71st LI red ?1778-83)
& 71st Grenadiers white 1776-?-1783)

Writing off the top of my head, before coffee, so I stand to be corrected.

The 40th Lights reenactment unit wear green feathers. They list themselves as part of the 2nd Battalion Lights, nicknamed the Bloodhounds. Their unit commander is regarded as a person of great knowledge of the period. Away from my research materials, so can't verify one way or the other, but I'd be very surprised if he was incorrect on that.

Well, those are the details I have.

And of course, FWIW the della Gatta paintings show 2LI with feathers of a kind of rusty brown, or the standard black, while St George's cartoons showing 2LI and 1st Grenadiers show no distinguishing feathers at all.

I'd be interested to know what the 40th group's decision was based on. Ive been looking into this topic for a while now. Never too late to learn something new.

It may be based on the 1778 Laye letter as offering the best guess from a contemporary source:

"The Light Infantry wear a green feather in their Caps & we the 
Grenadiers a White one in our Hatts." (Jamaica, Long Island, 12 Decr 1778
)

Laye does mention LI caps, however, (rather than hats) which chimes with Cootes of 37th LI Coy's orderly book.

Maj. Gen. Stirling's ref to red feathers for 2nd LI is interesting because as with the red feather of the 42nd (?battalion coys) he suggests the feathers were a routine matter, rather than some melodramatic battle exploit, embellished for posterity.

I forgot about the PoW being brigaded with the 16th and 71st Light Coys. My bad!

It seems to have been rare to do that, though.

OK, so to summarize. No one knows what the lights wore with any certainty, thus, for wargaming units, hats with plumes in almost any color you like, or you can have a unit with all the same caps, different caps by base stand and even a unit of highland lights; if you can find bonnets with plumes.

"The Amercians ever after Wayne's Affair called us 'The Bloodhound," Lt. Martin Hunter of the 52nd Lights Company had written. p59

The Philadelphia Campaign, Vol II, Germantown and the Roads to Valley Forge, by Thomas McGuire.

link

So to put a point on it, if you are doing Lights with Howe's army pre-Germantown, then likely only black feathers. Not sure how long they carried on the colored feather tradition, or if it ever went beyond the main army under Howe.

I believe the First Light battalion wore red feathers, the second green. IIRC, the put these on their hats after taking Philadelphia. In part, so I've read, they wore these to mark them to the Americans after Paoli. If you look at the Osprey book on the Philadelphia campaign, you'll see a modern depiction of the 2nd Lights pinned down at Birmingham Hill, wearing green feathers. Perhaps jumping the gun a bit if, indeed, they put them on after Paoli and capture of Philly, where supposedly they secured said feathers. Too tired to go digging further. First day back as work. :-)

If you really want to learn more, go to the AWI gaming group on FB. Some real history heavy weights troll those posts and will be happy to answer questions.

Yes, we do have a good idea what they wore. The problem is the uniforms for various light companies were not static.

Goes for a lot of the rest of the army, too.

Sometimes I miss the good old days. Warrant uniforms with bearskins for grenadiers, leather caps for the light troops and kilts for the highlanders.

Hg- it was actually the other way round.

If anyone wore red feathers, it was Major John Maitland's 2nd Light Infantry battalion, the men who dubbed the 'Bloodhounds' after leading the attack at Paoli Tavern- (why the 44th and 42nd RH escaped blame, since they were the troops that followed up 'clearing through the position,' history does not relate). 'Red/blood' does have a certain correspondence.

Howeer, the earliest record of the red feather story relating to Paoli Tavern does not emerge till 1851, in the 'Historical Record of the Forty-Sixth, or South Devonshire Regment of Foot' (whose light coy had been part of 2nd LI in 1777)

"It was this affair which gave the FORTY-SIXTH regiment Red Feathers, which it has ever since worn. The origin of the distinction is as follows:-

"The Americans having vowed vengeance for the attack at Paoli (which they deemed a "massacre"), and that they would give no quarter, the soldiers of the Light Battalion declared that in order to prevent any one not engaged in the action from suffering on their account, that they would dye the feathers worn in their caps red, as a distinguishing mark." (p. 22)

The reference to 'caps' is doubtless written from the perspective of a mid-C19th author (As is the touching concern of the brigands of the Light nfantry for the well-being of their colleagues in neighbouring regiments).

In 1833, the 46th had returned from India after 19 years abroad and it was noticed their light company were wearing a red cap distinction as opposed to the regulation green 'ball tuft' introduced shortly before their return. Their CO was asked to provide the Adjutant General dept. "the authority under which the 46th Regiment was permitted to wear the Red Feather." Their answer does not appear to have survived but it very likely provided the basis of the account in the 1851 history quoted above. It was certainly deemed satisfactory and the 46th were duly authorised to wear a red 'ball-tuft' on their caps in place of the regulation green. They subsequently cultivated the nickname 'Red feathers' and the distinction endured in one form or another, throughseveral amalgamations, until the beginning of this present century, being 'borrowed' along the way by other regiments based on claimed links with the Paoli attack in 1777.

Meanwhile, in 1822, early historian of the Highland regiments, Colonel David Stewart, inserted a footnote into his history of Frazer's 71st Highlanders ('Sketches of the Highlanders', II, 2nd ed.) Apparently based on a misreading of a garbled account he had received from John Maitland's nephew (which seemed to have confused the 'Paoli Massacre' with the 'Baylor Massacre), he set the 'defiant red feather' story in the context of the 71st Regiment as a whole.'

"During the skirmishing warfare in the Jerseys and Pennsylvania, in the years 1776 and 1777, he [John Maitland] was particularly active. Ever on the alert, and having his Highlanders always ready, he attracted the particular notice of General Washington. Some communications having passed between them as old acquaintances, although then opposed as enemies, Colonel Maitland sent intimation to the American commander, that in future his men would be distinguished by a red feather in their bonnets, so that he could not mistake them, nor avoid doing justice to their exploits, in annoying his posts, and obstructing his convoys and detachments; adding, that General Washington was too liberal not to acknowledge merit even in an enemy. Fraser's Highlanders wore the red feather after Colonel Maitland's death, and continued to do so till the conclusion of the war."

It's a mess, and the errors and fallacies are too numerous to list here, but it shows that the red feather 'tradition' linked to the companies of Maitland's 2nd Light Infanry had been circulating within the British army since at least the turn of the C18th, when Stewart's source was told the tale.

We are nonetheless left with the enigmatic accounts record referring to a red feather ordered for the light company of the 71st circa 1783. How it relates to all the foregoing is at least a two-bottle question.

It's not impossible that the 2nd Lights had adopted a red feather sometime in the winter or spring of 1778, and wore it when they sallied forth from Philadelphia, but there's no evidence.

There's a hint, just a hint, that the 2LI might have been wearing a red feather when they arrived in Pennsylvania and legends were subsequently attached.

This is suggested by AWI veteran James Stirling's recollection also in 1822, that-"early in the American War of 1776 when the [42nd]regiment was Brigaded with the Grenadiers and Light Infantry of the Army under the command of the late Marquis Cornwallis- at this period there were no regulation feathers – the grenadiers wore White Feathers, the first battalion Light Infantry wore Green,- the 2nd Light Infantry wore Red…"

Stirling's timings are too vague to set much store by this but it remains a possibilty. Note which battalion he states wore green feathers and which wore red. However, again, there is no confirmatory evidence.

Either way, by December 1778, the flank battalions having been intitally disbanded, a single light infantry battalion was reformed from the regiments remaining in New York after Grant's expedition had departed for the West Indies. There was no more 2nd LI battalion; presumably no more red feather; and we have clear reference to a green light infantry feather being worn at that point:

[1778] "Jamaica, Long Island 12 Decr, …The British Grenadiers & Light Infantry being cantooned here & always the fashion in action I applied to be attached to them which was granted…The Light Infantry wear a green feather in their Caps & we the Grenadiers a White one in our Hatts."
Letters of Francis Laye, Royal Artillery officer (National Army Museum manuscripts NAM 6807-154):

It's worth pointing out that the Light infantry company of the 40th Regiment was not attached to this light battalion, having departed for the Caribbean with Grant's force in November 1778, so this ref. would not appear to be relevant to their choice of green feather. Did some former members of 2nd LI continue to wear a red feather, having rejoined their regiment and departed New York for the West Indies? There's no evidence to hand. That would include the light coy of the 46th (the future 'Red Feathers') who were also part of the West Indies expedition.

Oh boy, how did I get here…

So, well, yes. Without doubt, as you say Hg, for those to whom these details are important, for the year 1776-77 plain black/grey ostrich feathers in the hats of the light infantry would probably be the 'safest' – but where would be the fun in that? >V:-)

Good stuff, 42nd. :-)

I'll be interested to see what any of the heavy weights say on FB, if anything at all.

I always questioned just where this warehouse in Philly was that hand thousands of green and red feathers for everyone to wear. :-)

There are, however, those period works of art that seem to indicate some officers did wear a red feather, but as you and I have discussed prior, you have to take some of the art work with a grain of salt.

"I always questioned just where this warehouse in Philly was"

Well, indeed. Or that clearing in the wood where they stooped to leach their existing feathers, dry them, dye them and dry them again before carrying on with pursuing the rebels up and down the river. The warehouses of Philadelphia were strippe bare. Shipping could not get up the Delawar. Shoes were two dollars a pair and demand for red feathers cannot have been great in that Quaker town.

There is one possible source of haberdashery that might have supplied the materials in late spring, but I am keeping that under my hat. Cap. Whatever.

amn keyboar

Then there's what the troops do--for example, upon landing in Spain in 1809, the 71st Foot were issued red cockades to show solidarity with Spain. Everyone had thrown them away by the end of the day…

By the 19th century, Grenadiers wore white plumes, center companies red with white tips, lights green with red tips. How a red anything might later have fit in to all this is anybody's guess.

The 'regulation feather' ordered in 1800, on the second attempt, confirmed a white-over-red feather for battalion and staff, white for grenadiers and Fusiliers, and plain green for light infantry and rifles.

A handful of regiments succeeded in retaining regimental variations thereafter, a white feather for the 5th (who seem to have fancied themselves as fusiliers), and a red feather for the 42nd RH (who gave offered explanations depending on who you spoke to). It was claimed the 42nd obtained permission fromm the King, althoguh no-one recorded this. The 5th appear to have just brazened it out for the next twenty odd years. The red feather allegedly retained after the AWI by the 46th regiment's light co left no mark upon the historical record until 1833.

The red cockade of the House of Borbon was ordered worn by all troops as a mark of respect to the King of Spain on crossing the border from Portugal but doees seem to have excited universal contempt among the troops. The men of the 42nd threw theirs in the river.

Considering the average British soldier of the time was a quasi criminal, illiterate moron, can we throw in intolerant of other cultures too?

I understand they used to start fights with and attack the Hessians because they were different.

Ah, tradition.

So the great and learned Don Hagist (if you don't have his books, run out and buy them now!) posted the following. I realize it contains some of what 42nd posted, but I am much too lazy to edit:

A British artillery officer wrote from Jamaica, Long Island, on 12 December 1778, after the two of each flank battalions were reduced to one of each:
"The British Grenadiers & Light Infantry being cantooned here & always the fashion in action I applied to be attached to them which was granted…

"The Light Infantry wear a green feather in their Caps & we the Grenadiers a White one in our Hatts."
[Francis Laye letters, NAM 6807-154, National Army Museum]
From Captain Eyre Coote's accounts when he commanded the light infantry company of the 38th Regiment, apparently for 1778 but not stated exactly when:
Moulds for the Caps: 0.1.2
Hair for the caps: 0.7.8
26 yds blanketing @2.4: 3.0.8
4 pieces yellow binding @2.4: 0.9.4
50 green feathers @2.4: 5.16.6
To Watson for working the Hair for the Caps: 0.7.10
To the Hatter for Dying the hair: 0.2.4
To making the Companys Caps: 6.5.5
[Eyre Coote papers, William L. Clements Library]

From a set of accounts concerning purchases for the 71st Regiment in 1783
Light Infantry Company, June 4th
36 Red Feathers 4 shilling each: 7pounds 4shillings
[WO 26/29/149 GD153/Box 1/Bundle 5, The National Archives]

The anecdote below is a bit muddled, pertaining not to the 71st Regiment's battalion companies but to the light infantry battalions in America, with which the subject officer served:
"I very well knew your uncle John in America, and a noble Fellow he was – it was he who first set the Example of wearing Feathers in the Caps of the Light Infantry – And it happen'd by a very memorable circumstance. It was the Battallion he commanded the 2nd B. 71 Regt which executed the famed Enterprise of the Night attack when Lady Washington's Dragoons, as they were called were suprized, and most of them bayoneted, this Loss & disgrace gave the Americans much uneasiness and vexation – and Washington took an opportunity that occurred to send a Message to Col Maitland to this Effect that he should not fail to watch the movements of the Battallion, and to have full satisfaction whenever an occasion might offer – On this being told to Colonel Maitland, he answered, tell Washington that we will soon give him an Opportunity, and for fear that he should not know the Battallion, I will order all our Men to wear Red Feathers in their Caps – Accordingly Red Feathers were immediately mounted by the 2nd Batt of 71 Reg and were ever afterwards displayed – This was the origin of the British Army wearing Feathers – Very soon afterwards the 1 Batt 71 Reg adopted the Crest & assumed the Green Plume; which last has become the distinctive mark of the Light Inf: probably because it is to be preferred for the Service of Light Troops from the same Reason that the Rifle Corps wear Green & not Red Clothing. This anecdote of Col Maitland I consider to be quite established, for General Grenfield assured me he knew it to be true, he being with the Army in American at the time."
[David Stewart of Garth correspondence, 9 March 1821,

Minipig wrote:

"Considering the average British soldier of the time was a quasi criminal, illiterate moron, can we throw in intolerant of other cultures too?"

Wow, not sure where to start with that one. No offense, but I don't think this displays a very good knowledge of the period. It also shows a somewhat typical Napoleonic-creep, and in part movie (Waterloo) take on the AWI British Army. Of course, which none of it is correct. The typical British soldier was 29, according to Spring, and many came from the textile industry (out of work), or were common labors, though some were even gentlemen volunteers (upper class, educated, waiting for an opening in the officer ranks). The typical Crown soldier was no better, or worse likely than his American counterpart. While there was some theft at the time in both armies (the Germans were the most notorious), there were often hard consequences as well (in both armies). I suggest you buy Don Hagist's book on British soldiers, read it, then come back and comment.

"I understand they used to start fights with and attack the Hessians because they were different."

You mean like the riflemen of VA, MD, and PA fought with the New Englanders in the army outside of Boston as they were "different?" If you have read some books on the subject you'd know that the British held a low opinion of many of the German troops, but not so much for being different as being slow on the battlefield. That said, the British Army had a long history of serving with, and in the case of the SYW, under German soldiers. The fact that army units fight among themselves, and often with allies, is as old as military history. Happened all the time in the US military in WWII.

Honestly, I can't tell if you are just unread on the period or just looking for a rise from your posts, so excuse me if is the later and I quit taking the bait.

Well, it is of course gratifying that my hours of study have been corroborated by a heavyweight.

The letter quoted last was in fact from John Maitland's nephew Frederick and arrived too late to be incorporated into the first edition of Stewart's 'Sketches of the Highlanders.'

Fredrick, by 1821 an ageing general in is 60s, was citing from a remembered conversation from 1803 which he had with General William Grinfield , who was not a light infantry man, as suggested, but an officer of the Third Foot Guards who had two periods of service in America between 1777 and 1781, and who presumably met John Maitland when he was Major of Marines in command of the 2nd Light Infantry battalion rather than the 2nd Bn. 71st into which Maitland transferred as Lt Col shortly before they left for Georgia in the autumn of 1778, at the time Grinfield returned to Britain.

Maitland's confused anecdote draws on the involvement of the light coy of the 71st as part of Maitland's 2nd LI (rather than the 2nd Bn 71st), in the notorious attack on Baylor's Dragoons at Old Tappan, NJ, in September 1778, but the red feather aspect of the story would seem to be confusing the Tappan 'massacre' with the 'Paoli massacre', so-called, of almost exactly a year earlier which also involved the 2nd LI (inc the light coy of the 71st. Interesting that it echoes the '1st: Green. 2nd: Red' pattern of other sources mentioned in earlier posts.

Whether it was Fred.Maitland or Wm Grinfield who was getting muddled- or maybe a bit of both, it's difficult to say.

David Stewart then took the anecdote and added a pared down version for the 2nd Edition of his 'Sketches' and inserted it into a footnote relating to John Maitland's death in Savannah, mentioning the Black Watch red hackle in the same sentence and thus causing endless confusion ever since.