Military Headgear

I have always been intrigued by some of the military headgear from the past, many of which seemed totally impractical. The Napoleonic era certainly could lay claim to having some of the worst of all time, and I was surprised to find that the hats of that period could actually be useful as the illustration shows. It's even the perfect height!

 

Yeah, those red pantaloons, red caps and white foot coverings were sure sharp looking. Their great advantage was that they made easier targets for their adversaries against a green brush background.

Private to Sergeant: "Hey Captain, don't you think it would be better if we wore a dark green outfit"?

Sergeant to Private: "Quit your bellyaching and wear what you are told, we know what is best for you"!

 

Yes, you have it right! The illustration does indeed show men from the British 95th Infantry, one of the first "Special Units" ever employed by a "modern" army and using different battlefield tactics. They were armed with the Baker Rifle, a firearm with a grooved barrel, a true rifle, and not the smoothbore "Brown Bess" musket then in common usage by the average soldier.

 

Ummm, did you use muskets or rifles? (LOL) I know the British Army from back then was well respected, but those red uniforms were dumb, really dumb!

 

When you think of soldiering from back then, man were those guys brave. They lined up shoulder to shoulder in rows and marched across open fields right into grape shot cannon fire and massed musket volley's from the defending force. Unbelievable!

Private to Sergeant: "Don't you think that we should attack in little groups of men using all available cover to attack the enemy? A small force attacking in the center, with others detailed to close in on either flank who would then fire their weapons and close with the bayonet?"

Sergeant to Private: "Quit your bellyaching and do what you are told! We know which is the best way to attack the enemy".

 

I know - I was joking. Our Civil War starting in 1860 kept up the practice.

But actually, like we saw with the 95th Rifles at least the some of the tactics were slowly changing. Men of the 95th would take position behind cover and fire on the enemy. And let's not forget the first battle of the American Revolutionary War in 1776 where as the British soldiers attempted their retreat back to Boston, the Patriots fired at them from behind trees and other forms of cover.

If I remember right, British reports from that action thought such tactics removed from the norms of civilized warfare and didn't like them one bit. The Patriots did suffer a bit however because once their only shot was fired, the British soldiers in many instances closed with the bayonet.

 

That is certainly sound reasoning during set piece large battle situations and I had not thought of those reasons before. Still not good though when let's say smaller groups of soldiers were moving through a forest like here in North America as British troops normally did during the 1700's. Red uniforms against green foliage does not allow for unseen or stealthy movement, and it really boggles my mind that the powers that be in those days could not understand that.

 

Yes, the Braddock expedition - now that was a monumental trek, building that road from the Hagerstown, Md. area all the way to Pittsburg, Pa. But those "red coats" also were a handicap in other areas of Eastern North America like Northern New York State, especially the areas along the Hudson River from NYC to the Canadian border. The British had forts all along there, places like Fort Edward, Fort Ticonderoga, placed to control the area and the Hudson River and Lake Champlain.

The area has a very interesting history from the 1700's, like massacre's of settlers by the Indians etc. Now we drive through the place at 60 mph, safe and snug in our cars, but it was truly a different experience back then. Have you ever seen the movie "The last of the Mohicans" with Daniel Day Lewis? That was all about what happened in that area of the country.