Lead

Apr 11 12 7:55 AM

Tags : :

Does anyone know whether musicians wore reversed colours in the 1777 period or is that one of those things that would have been impossible to maintain at that stage of the war?
Quote    Reply   

#1 [url]

Apr 12 12 5:13 PM

I suspect it depends on the regiment. Some, like the Delaware Regiment, were extremely well outfitted. Others didn't have complete uniforms for the soldiers, so it's unlikely those regiments would have made an extra effort to dress their musicians.

Then let us fill a bumper, and drink a health to those
Who carry caps and pouches, and wear the loup'ed clothes.

Quote    Reply   

#2 [url]

Apr 13 12 10:39 AM

Continentals generally followed British practice in this regard during the first half of the war, although as Cornet says, some units went for alternatives and many had more important issues to address. Sometimes musicians would just have lace on their uniform; occasionally, they were given captured British infantry coats (especially from regiments with blue facings, as these "reversed" one of the most common coat/facing combos).

The "official" regulations in 1779 provided for all units to have reversed colours for musicians.

Quote    Reply   

#3 [url]

Apr 15 12 10:52 AM

Continental Misicians

Thanks for that. It seems the best way of looking at it is, if you are painting a "smart" regiment then reverse the colours and if you are painting a "scruffy" regiment then don't. This of course does not necessarily reflect the quality of the regiment in question.

Artist

Quote    Reply   

#4 [url]

Apr 17 12 5:16 PM

Mmm, yes. Sort of.

Though I think even a "smart" regiment might look scruffy by the end of a campaign. Whereas a "scruffy" regiment might be in tatters or near naked by the end of that same campaign.

I think your rule of thumb will work fine for you. All the equivocation and hair-splitting serves to remind us that determining norms may be impossible, so in the end just be sure to make yourself happy with the appearance of your troops.

Personally, I lean toward a more idealized version because I like things neat, and arguably the armies would occasionally present as neat (these are game pieces after all, like a chess pawn or bishop; also, I'd personally prefer to be remembered in a clean-and-shaved condition rather than a snap shot of a particularly haggard day, so I imagine they would too). Others prefer a more distressed treatment of their units because they feel that adds to the realism; and unquestionably, the armies were often outfitted in hard worn uniforms, kit, and equipment.

There is no absolute right answer ... only a range of answers that could be correct at a given time and place. If you wanted to portray the 2d Rhode Island Regiment in August of 1777, with extensive research you might be able to achieve a fairly authentic representation. However, that unit would have looked differently three months earlier or three months later. And they would have been supplied differently than the 4th Connecticut Regiment serving in the same brigade, which itself would have looked both differently 3 months before/after August 1777 and would have been supplied differently than the Rhode Island Regiment at those times too.

In short, there were a variety of factors that would play upon the appearance of a regiment during their tours of duty. And those factors were in constant flux.

Then let us fill a bumper, and drink a health to those
Who carry caps and pouches, and wear the loup'ed clothes.

Quote    Reply   

#5 [url]

Apr 18 12 8:33 PM

A point to bear in mind is that there was a pecking order for who was issued what uniforms/cloth supplies were available. Quite often, you will see a certain number of completed items (eg coats) that are just enough to kit out, say, all the sergeants in a regiment. There were two reasons for this - one was the obvious one of shortages, the other was that it took at least half the calendar year to recruit a regiment up to field strength and it was therefore not until the autumn that the CO had sufficient men to justify big clothing requests for the rank-and-file (although there would often be a few re-enlistees and "spring thaw" recruits at the start of the campaign season).

From Katcher's book and the two Ospreys, depending on the amounts delivered, it looks like the order was usually, but not definitively:
- officers who could not afford their own uniforms
- sergeants (including drum/fife majors)
- musicians
- corporals
- privates
So if only 3 or 4 suits of clothing were delivered, the officers got them, with perhaps 1 to the sergeant major.

Thus, something would often be supplied to distinguish the musicians in a unit where the rank-and-file were all still wearing civvies, or such a mish-mash of items that the unit effectively had no identifiable uniform. The drum-major and fife-major might often have a sergeant's uniform which was heavily laced in order to distinguish them from the other NCOs.

RtL

Quote    Reply   
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help