42nd Royal Highland Regiment of Foot Uniforms c. 1757-1765

[BJamesBeck]

First of all I'm not sure if this is the right section of the forum to post this, so mods, please feel free to move it if not.

Second of all, before I start writing too much a my inquiry gets buried so deep no one reads it, here it is. Those of you who are British F&I War reenactors, what are your thoughts on the lace of officer's coats? In my research I have been reading various things about gold and silver trim. Some seem to say gold for CO's and some say gold or silver. A lot of the sources seem to indicate that gold lace was for CO's and silver for NCO's. Is that the case, or was it up to the individual officer when he was having his uniform made?

Now on to the meat here. I have been researching a certain captain from the 42nd to portray at rendezvous and historical events. I have been in contact with the most local 42nd group to me and they have shared tons of great information, but are sadly located roughly 5 hours drive away from me. The man I am looking to portray is Captain James Stewart of Urrard. Part of what sparked my interest in this is being of Stewart lineage on my mother's side, though Captain Stewart is not a direct relation. Through researching this man though, I have discovered two direct ancestors that were officers in highland regiments, one a captain in the 64th in the 1740's and one an ensign in the 42nd in the late 1780's. These discoveries have made me even more interested in putting together a persona for this man. Below I have attached all of the history I have been able to assemble so far for Captain Stewart and the beginnings of my research on his wife (who was previously married to another man in the 42nd before marrying James).

I have been doing tons of research on the uniforms of the 42nd around the time that James was in the regiment, partially because of the time that he joined. Captian Stewart purchased his commission in 1757 and helped raise one of three additional companies for the regiment in 1758. This was the same year that the regiment became a "Royal Regiment", meaning that the facings of their regimental coats were changed from buff to royal blue. I have recently found one source that includes a first hand quote from a lieutenant from one of the three companies raised in 1758 that states that the facings on their regimental coats were blue, and other first hand sources that seem to point to the entire regiment receiving the "new pattern" coats by the spring of 1760. I have also attached a photo that I believe represents the period from 1758 to 1760 when the regiment wore a mixture of the old pattern coats and the new, with the officer and enlisted man on the left and right in the new patterns and the man in the center in the old. This is discussed further in the second document I have attached that is my research into the uniforms and when they were likely changed over. I have tried to sight my sources as much as possible in the document and I apologize if it is slightly disorganized. This post is partially for feedback on the conclusions that I've come to and partially because I thought some of you might find the information that I've compiled interesting. I'd appreciate any discussions and feedback from those of you that may have some insight. Below I will post the basic breakdown of what I have planned for my outfit to represent Captain Stewart of Urrard for those of you that don't want to read through the documents.

Captain James Stewart of Urrard Uniform c. 1758-1763

• Hat: Dark blue bonnet with red band and ball or taller dark blue bonnet with red ball and red/white diced trim around the brim. Both with black cockade and black ostrich feather on the left.​
• Neck: Black or white neck stock/cravat and silver gorget with King’s arms and “42”.​
• Accoutrements: Baldric/sword belt, waist belt, and “possibles” bag all of black leather. Crimson silk sash. Possibly a white haversack in place of possibles type bag.​
• Shirt: White linen shirt, possibly ruffled at the cuffs.​
• Waistcoat: White/buff or royal blue with white buttons.​
• Jacket: Short “madder” red Highland jacket laced silver and edged white (white braid with 2 red stripes) lapelled to waist in royal blue with 11 white buttonholes and 11 numbered white buttons. Horizontal pockets with silver laces (same lace as above), each with pewter buttons. Collar and cuffs royal blue (slashed in the British pattern) laced gold/silver (same lace as above) with gold/silver buttonholes and numbered white buttons on the sleeve.​
• Kilt: Full plaid of government set tartan, aka Black Watch, (dark blue with dark green cross-hatching with upper part affixed to left shoulder. Also likely a small kilt/philibeag for hot weather. Plain black leather sporran.​
• Lower Legs: Red/white diagonally diced hose with red garters, dark green wool leggings with red garters, black leather shoes with silver/pewter buckles.​
• Weapons: Basket hilted broadsword, dirk or knife, highland pattern all steel pistol or officer’s pattern pistol, and possibly a sgian-dubh/sock knife. (short pattern fusil?)​

Additional camp type equipment and such would be added a little bit at a time as I have the funds available. Thanks again for any opinions, information, or feedback!

 

[Artificer]

Second of all, before I start writing too much a my inquiry gets buried so deep no one reads it, here it is. Those of you who are British F&I War reenactors, what are your thoughts on the lace of officer's coats? In my research I have been reading various things about gold and silver trim. Some seem to say gold for CO's and some say gold or silver. A lot of the sources seem to indicate that gold lace was for CO's and silver for NCO's. Is that the case, or was it up to the individual officer when he was having his uniform made?

NO, it was NOT up to the Individual Officer, unless he was the overall Commander of British forces! Grin.

Special Gold or Silver Trim and or lace came from:

Somewhere in the history of each regiment, His Majesty's Pleasure or His Commander in Chief, authorized the colors of facings and trim for each Regiment. After that, it came from traditions of the Regiment and the orders of the Commanding Officers of each Regiment.

One really should not make generalizations, because they won't stand up to scrutiny for all Regiments. Best thing to do is research each and any Regiment you are interested in.

Though the following doesn't address gold/silver for Officers, you may be interested in the following British Uniform Chart for the FIW.

French and Indian War - Uniforms Chart for British Regiments (Army) (warof1812.ca)

Gus

 

[BJamesBeck]

NO, it was NOT up to the Individual Officer, unless he was the overall Commander of British forces! Grin.

Special Gold or Silver Trim and or lace came from:

Somewhere in the history of each regiment, His Majesty's Pleasure or His Commander in Chief, authorized the colors of facings and trim for each Regiment. After that, it came from traditions of the Regiment and the orders of the Commanding Officers of each Regiment.

One really should not make generalizations, because they won't stand up to scrutiny for all Regiments. Best thing to do is research each and any Regiment you are interested in.

You may be interested in the following British Uniform Chart for the FIW.

French and Indian War - Uniforms Chart for British Regiments (Army) (warof1812.ca)

Gus

Okay that is basically what I was thinking. I have read lot of references of officers having gold trim in the 42nd but also references of them removing much of it after a short time serving in North America due to French provincials and Native Americans tending to target the officers. Definitely plenty of first hand accounts of officers trying to be less conspicuous by removing much of the lace, their shoulder sashes, gorgets, etc. So I may do my regimental jacket with minimal gold trim to avoid those pesky marksman!

I've definitely done plenty of research on the facings as that's what had me most worried. The change from buff to royal blue is pretty complicated for the 42nd as the 1st Battalion was already in North America, 3 more companies raised in 1758 just before the royal proclamation (which became part of 2nd Battalion) and then 7 more companies raised after the proclamation to complete the 2nd Battlion. It's just a bit of a muddy water situation with the lace as many of the sources just say things like "officers wore similar jackets to the enlisted men but with silver or gold lace". I believe, from piecing together sources, that for the 42nd, sergeants wore silver while anything above wore gold. But like I said, it appears this got a bit less uniform the longer they were in North America as the commissioned officers actively made changes to not stand out as much.

Thanks for the input!

 

[Artificer]

Captain James Stewart of Urrard Uniform c. 1758-1763

• Jacket: Short “madder” red Highland jacket laced silver and edged white (white braid with 2 red stripes) lapelled to waist in royal blue with 11 white buttonholes and 11 numbered white buttons. Horizontal pockets with silver laces (same lace as above), each with pewter buttons. Collar and cuffs royal blue (slashed in the British pattern) laced gold/silver (same lace as above) with gold/silver buttonholes and numbered white buttons on the sleeve.​

Are you SURE the Jacket was "Madder Red?" As that was not the Norm for Officers. Officers cloth was almost always a finer finished wool and it was "Scarlet" in color, from Cochineal Dye.

Gus

 

[BJamesBeck]

Are you SURE the Jacket was "Madder Red?" As that was not the Norm for Officers. Officers cloth was almost always a finer finished wool and it was "Scarlet" in color, from Cochineal Dye.

Gus

You're correct, it would be more of a scarlet. I had madder on the brain from a separate conversation.

 

[Artificer]

You're correct. I had madder on the brain from a separate conversation.

Grin. Trust me, I understand. LOL.

OK, something that bothers me a bit from " Description c. 1740 Uniform:"

Specifically, " the sergeants' jackets were trimmed with silver lace which they provided for themselves."

Actually, this is the first I've heard of it and it doesn't make sense. So I've been chewing on it a bit. Serjeants (18th century spelling) did not make enough money to afford silver trim. If this information is correct and I kind of doubt it, then MAYBE it was because it was still early enough that sons of lesser Sub Chieftans or somewhat affluent families had to settle for NCO ranks as there were not enough Commissioned Ranks available? However, this is purely a guess on my part.

Gus

 

[BJamesBeck]

Grin. Trust me, I understand. LOL.

OK, something that bothers me a bit from " Description c. 1740 Uniform:"

Specifically, " the sergeants' jackets were trimmed with silver lace which they provided for themselves."

Actually, this is the first I've heard of it and it doesn't make sense. So I've been chewing on it a bit. Serjeants (18th century spelling) did not make enough money to afford silver trim. If this information is correct and I kind of doubt it, then MAYBE it was because it was still early enough that sons of lesser Sub Chieftans or somewhat affluent families had to settle for NCO ranks as there were not enough Commissioned Ranks available? However, this is purely a guess on my part.

Gus

I believe that may have been the case. There are a lot of references of affluent gentlemen being found in the ranks from top to bottom. There are references even into the campaigns of 1758-1760 noting that the men of the regiment were told again to limit their baggage to just what they could carry, interesting in that these statements don't specifically mention the officers. It seems to be that the first large influx of not "upper echelon" warrior class recruits comes along with the 7 companies raised later in 1758 to complete the 2nd Battalion. In these companies there is mention of recruiting Irish, which change their names to sound more "highland" so that they are allowed to join.

 

[Artificer]

I believe that may have been the case. There are a lot of references of affluent gentlemen being found in the ranks from top to bottom. There are references even into the campaigns of 1758-1760 noting that the men of the regiment were told again to limit their baggage to just what they could carry, interesting in that these statements don't specifically mention the officers. It seems to be that the first large influx of not "upper echelon" warrior class recruits comes along with the 7 companies raised later in 1758 to complete the 2nd Battalion. In these companies there is mention of recruiting Irish, which change their names to sound more "highland" so that they are allowed to join.

You may be interested that from our research, we found most of the "Other Ranks" during the FIW were proficient in the use of the basket hilt broadsword. This from the fact that many of those men came from "Men at Arms" employed and trained by Chieftains and Sub Chieftains. They also schooled the remainder of the "Other Ranks," who did not have such training, in the use of the sword while in Garrison duty before the FIW.

However by the AWI, most of the "Other Ranks" and some of the NCO's had little or no training with the sword. This was the end result of the Proscription Acts.

Gus

 

[BJamesBeck]

You may be interested that from our research, we found most of the "Other Ranks" during the FIW were proficient in the use of the basket hilt broadsword. This from the fact that many of those men came from "Men at Arms" employed and trained by Chieftains and Sub Chieftains. They also schooled the remainder of the and "Other Ranks," who did not have such training, in the use of the sword while in Garrison duty before the FIW.

However by the AWI, most of the "Other Ranks" and some of the NCO's had little or no training with the sword. This was the end result of the Proscription Acts.

Gus

I had read a bit about that. Specifically remember an instance of a couple of the men being sent to be "shown off" to the king, both being of fairly low rank I believe. If I remember correctly though, one of them was the son of a chieftain and he was specifically chosen for his skill with a sword and good looks.

That brings me to another issue. What sword to get. I have been looking at a few options. Cold steel I have experience with some of their stuff, which seems to be good quality for the money. That one is the cheapest option. I have also heard Hanwei makes a nice quality one. I fear these two options may be of a slightly later pattern but with some slight modifications could be passable. Then there is the "battlecry culloden" one from museum replicas. Do you have any experience or thoughts on any of these? I think I have found a correct black baldric/shoulder belt as well with a frog for the scabbard here:

Baldric/shoulder belt

 

[Artificer]

I had read a bit about that. Specifically remember an instance of a couple of the men being sent to be "shown off" to the king, both being of fairly low rank I believe. If I remember correctly though, one of them was the son of a chieftain and he was specifically chosen for his skill with a sword and good looks.

That brings me to another issue. What sword to get. I have been looking at a few options. Cold steel I have experience with some of their stuff, which seems to be good quality for the money. That one is the cheapest option. I have also heard Hanwei makes a nice quality one. I fear these two options may be of a slightly later pattern but with some slight modifications could be passable. Then there is the "battlecry culloden" one from museum replicas. Do you have any experience or thoughts on any of these? I think I have found a correct black baldric/shoulder belt as well with a frog for the scabbard here:

Baldric/shoulder belt

First of all, the Baldric you linked is correct for "Other Ranks," but not correct for an Officer, as it has a frog for a bayonet and is not fancy enough for an Officer. I think I can help you with this, but I'm going to have to dig out some information.

As to the swords, first let me inform you of my personal bias. I have collected real/original battle swords in the past, so I'm more picky than some folks. When I did an Officer impression for UnCivil War, I found an 1880's period unmounted M1850 sword blade that was fully combat worthy, then assembled the sword with mostly original parts for the hilt and scabbard, plus I hand sewed the scabbard.

Finally, I have LARGE hands, so many of the hilts of production Basket Hilt Swords are too small for me. Now original basket hilts were supposed to be rather "close fitting" around the hand, but even so, I strongly suggest you try them in your hand before you buy.

I almost bought a Cold Steel Basket Hilt BACK sword when they were available, as they were a pretty good copy of the AWI Back Sword - BTW an excellent one and original scabbard used to be on display at the Yorktown Victory Center here in Virginia. I realized I would have to make a period correct scabbard, though, which I could and can do. Now the original Issued AWI Back Sword was with a Steel Hilt, so that also made it more accurate.

Before you invest money in a sword, I strongly advise you to do as much research as possible. An excellent book that shows both "Stirling" and "Glasgow" and other period correct hilt swords is:
" Culloden the Swords and the Sorrows."

Culloden the Swords and the Sorrows - AbeBooks

Other swords to consider are:

Scottish basket hilted swords which Donnie Shearer, aka The Mad Piper used to make which he called the "Jacobite hilt."

and

Scottish Basket Hilts by Armour Class

Gus

 

[BJamesBeck]

Curious to see what you have on the baldric. I had thought with the one that I linked I would gussy it up a bit with a silver buckle. There are also lots of mentions in sources of officers also starting to carry fusils while in North America to blend in further with the enlisted men. So I thought that when/if I add that to my equipment at some point it would be good to have the bayonet also. Definitely open to your suggestions/recommendations though!

Good info with the swords. Thankfully the cold steel options does have a steel guard, though I believe it is blued. But that wouldn't be a problem to remove, and the cloth lining in the guard could be easily removed. I'll definitely look into those other options as well. Those Armour Class ones look really nice, though maybe a bit more than I was looking to spend.

 

[Rod Man]

Hey guys, this is pretty neat, got a silly question, what is a "Facing"?

 

[BJamesBeck]

Hey guys, this is pretty neat, got a silly question, what is a "Facing"?

When I use "facing", I'm referring to the contrasting color on the regimental coats usually found on the lapels, collar, and cuffs. I'm not sure if that is technically the correct term but it is quicker than typing out "lapels, collar, and cuffs" each time.

In the photo attached below, the "facing" would be the buff on the collar and cuffs, this is the early pattern 42nd jacket that lacked lapels.

 

[Rod Man]

aah, tracking...thanks.

 

[OhioHawkeye]

When you make or buy your hose, remember they are not socks.

From personal experience, there are two different patterns to use. Both are correct. However, one pattern is better for sensitive feet like mine as it lacks the seam on the bottom of the foot....that seam guaranteed me a hot spot or blister every time.

 

[BJamesBeck]

When you make or buy your hose, remember they are not socks.

From personal experience, there are two different patterns to use. Both are correct. However, one pattern is better for sensitive feet like mine as it lacks the seam on the bottom of the foot....that seam guaranteed me a hot spot or blister every time.

Do you have any recommendations on where to buy the hose? That is one piece that seems a bit hard to come by. I have looked around a bit and found a few options, some of which were well over $100, which seems a bit excessive for something that will probably wear out the quickest of any of the gear. Or if you have made them, do you have a pattern to you recommend and a retailer that sells the correct material? I haven't really looked into making them yet.

 

[Artificer]

Brian,

You had some quotes from this book, but don't know if you have the readable version?

History of the 42nd Royal Highlanders - "The Black watch" now the first battalion "The Black watch" (Royal Highlanders) 1729-1893. Illustrated by Harry Payne : Groves, John Percy : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Gus

 

[Artificer]

Curious to see what you have on the baldric. I had thought with the one that I linked I would gussy it up a bit with a silver buckle. There are also lots of mentions in sources of officers also starting to carry fusils while in North America to blend in further with the enlisted men. So I thought that when/if I add that to my equipment at some point it would be good to have the bayonet also. Definitely open to your suggestions/recommendations though!

Good info with the swords. Thankfully the cold steel options does have a steel guard, though I believe it is blued. But that wouldn't be a problem to remove, and the cloth lining in the guard could be easily removed. I'll definitely look into those other options as well. Those Armour Class ones look really nice, though maybe a bit more than I was looking to spend.

Brian,

The arthritis in my hands is acting up, so will get back with you later. Did you see the link to the readable book?

Gus

 

[Grenadier1758]

@bryanbekk, I am sure you have seen the paintings by Morier as included in Gale's "A Soldier Like Way" describing the material culture of the British Infantry from 1751 to 1768. Those uniforms on page 93 from 1751 have the buff facings. More important they show the lacing of the 42nd Regiment. Lacing is not just a simple stripe of tape. Often it features a "worm" or pattern woven into the tape. The lacing for the 42nd has such a red "worm" woven into the lacing.

Gale also describes the uniforms of the Highlanders.

 

[BJamesBeck]

First of all, the Baldric you linked is correct for "Other Ranks," but not correct for an Officer, as it has a frog for a bayonet and is not fancy enough for an Officer. I think I can help you with this, but I'm going to have to dig out some information.

As to the swords, first let me inform you of my personal bias. I have collected real/original battle swords in the past, so I'm more picky than some folks. When I did an Officer impression for UnCivil War, I found an 1880's period unmounted M1850 sword blade that was fully combat worthy, then assembled the sword with mostly original parts for the hilt and scabbard, plus I hand sewed the scabbard.

Finally, I have LARGE hands, so many of the hilts of production Basket Hilt Swords are too small for me. Now original basket hilts were supposed to be rather "close fitting" around the hand, but even so, I strongly suggest you try them in your hand before you buy.

I almost bought a Cold Steel Basket Hilt BACK sword when they were available, as they were a pretty good copy of the AWI Back Sword - BTW an excellent one and original scabbard used to be on display at the Yorktown Victory Center here in Virginia. I realized I would have to make a period correct scabbard, though, which I could and can do. Now the original Issued AWI Back Sword was with a Steel Hilt, so that also made it more accurate.

Before you invest money in a sword, I strongly advise you to do as much research as possible. An excellent book that shows both "Stirling" and "Glasgow" and other period correct hilt swords is:
" Culloden the Swords and the Sorrows."

Culloden the Swords and the Sorrows - AbeBooks

Other swords to consider are:

Scottish basket hilted swords which Donnie Shearer, aka The Mad Piper used to make which he called the "Jacobite hilt."

and

Scottish Basket Hilts by Armour Class

Gus

Brian,

You had some quotes from this book, but don't know if you have the readable version?

History of the 42nd Royal Highlanders - "The Black watch" now the first battalion "The Black watch" (Royal Highlanders) 1729-1893. Illustrated by Harry Payne : Groves, John Percy : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Gus

Yep, I had found the readable version of that book and have nearly read all of it! Thank you though!

@bryanbekk, I am sure you have seen the paintings by Morier as included in Gale's "A Soldier Like Way" describing the material culture of the British Infantry from 1751 to 1768. Those uniforms on page 93 from 1751 have the buff facings. More important they show the lacing of the 42nd Regiment. Lacing is not just a simple stripe of tape. Often it features a "worm" or pattern woven into the tape. The lacing for the 42nd has such a red "worm" woven into the lacing.

Gale also describes the uniforms of the Highlanders.

Yep, I realize it has the red in it, having talked to the group down at DeChartres that that you got me in contact with, it sounds like they are going to share with me how they make theirs! So thanks for getting me in contact with them! I will get some of that made. I have seen evidence of the officers removing all but a little of the gold lace/trim. What would you say they would have left on? The trim around the edges of the facings? I believe it shows that trim on the uniform in the picture I have attached. Or perhaps that is the white trim with red worm around the edges?