"British troops at Lexington and Concord." Topic

8 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.

Please use the Complaint button (!) to report problems on the forums.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the Getting Started with 18th Century Gaming Message Board

Back to the American Revolution Message Board

Areas of Interest

18th Century

Featured Hobby News Article

Printable Papercraft Collection I Available

The Frigate Sailing Ship: Pride of The British Royal Navy

Top-Rated Ruleset

Volley & Bayonet

Rating:

Featured Showcase Article

1:700 Black Seas British Brigs

Editor in Chief Bill paints brigs for the British fleet.

Featured Profile Article

First Look: Black Seas

Editor in Chief Bill explores the Master & Commander starter set for Black Seas.

Current Poll

Why Should a Player of Historicals Try 40K? (Round 2)

Featured Book Review

Ireland and the Monarchy

Bobgnar	20 Nov 2025 10:10 p.m. PST
I have been reading about the battle at the "rude bridge that arched the flood" and books say the Brits in the original foray were light and grenadier companies with some marines. Yet, almost all the images shown in the Ken Burns, et al series on the AWI show troops in tricorns? Not Percy's follow-up, but the first troops there. I am just getting started into the episode so can a knowledgeable person set me straight? What do light troops of that time look like, do they have tricorns? I do know grenadier headgear. Thanks much
John the OFM	20 Nov 2025 10:48 p.m. PST
Light infantry had a wide variety of hats and caps. They didn't wear tricornes. Plus they had shorter jackets and "wings" on the shoulder. Here is just one example. link The plumed slouch hat came later in the war. Both Perry and Foundry have figures with different caps. Check them out. I suggest that you watch "April Morning", a TV movie. It was mentioned earlier that Ken Burns didn't care to use reenactors. If he had, you would have seen proper caps. They were used on April Morning.
Old Contemptible	21 Nov 2025 1:24 a.m. PST
Some of those amatuer watercolor paintings showed the British were wearing shakos. Like what was worn in the Napoleonic wars. I don't remember who they said painted it. Some American private maybe from what is now Maine. I had to put it on pause and study it and it looked like British Napoleonic uniforms. It looked like something from the War of 1812. How did that get into the film?
79thPA	21 Nov 2025 2:54 a.m. PST
Because that's what the prop department had laying around.
Frederick	21 Nov 2025 5:31 a.m. PST
Agree with 79th PA – like Youtuber posting videos of WWII with WWI Mk VI tanks rumbling thru
John the OFM	21 Nov 2025 7:36 a.m. PST
The caps in "April Morning" have a nice variety. They even have proper color facings. Ironically, these would probably only work in 1775 Boston. After the British evacuated, and then came back, almost all such hats, including Grenadier bearskins, were left "in storage". These caps were considered regimental property, and not owned by the individual soldier. The soldier paid for his uniform through pay "stoppages". 🙄
McKinstry	21 Nov 2025 11:58 a.m. PST
Apparently Ken Burns has some issue/choice not to show reenactors faces thus lots of drone shots and neck down close ups.
Parzival	21 Nov 2025 2:10 p.m. PST
If you use re-enactors and show their faces, then they are now "actors," and have to be compensated in accordance with Screen Actors Guild agreements with the various production companies and networks. No faces, no acting, and thus cheaper. (Call that a maybe— I really don't know, but SAG is a litigious bunch, so I'd believe it if it proved true.) It's also possible the producers didn't want to be caught using the same guys in every battle/military scene. "Hey, didn't he die at Bunker Hill? What's he doing at Guilford Courthouse? And in the British army?"