John Jenkins Fort Necessity Line? (1 Viewer)

BlakeWR85

Specialist
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
315
Just wondering who out there thinks that John should do a Ft. Necessity line. What do you think it should include? Provincial Troops, Washington figure (in red va militia uniform), carolina independent company, natives, french, coulon de villiers figure, artillery crew w/ swivel cannons...what else? Besides the fort and interior building.
 
Ticonderoga is a good idea, the only argument I have for Necessity first is that is sorta goes along with the Monongahela series ;) Frontline has sorta taken over the highlanders, and Royal Rousillon regmt., and they started a new embankment, correct me if I'm wrong, but are they trying to recreate the highlanders attacking up the french abatis at fort Ti? Maybe john doesn't want to step on frontline's toes (he might break their foot!)
 
Good Morning!!!

I think we have most of the elements needed for Fort Necessity already including Washington, so I doubt this will be a separate release targeting Fort Necessity. However, I have no idea about the Independent Company from South Carolina that are described as colonial British regulars -- Captain McKay. No regimental ties???

Although I have been pushing hard for Grant's Defeat (Battle of Fort Duquesne), I have seen the light (Combat's light), and my money is on Pontiac's War/Bushy Run.

What would be interesting is the marketing aspect of almost any new release as the regiments involved are likely to have been involved in more than 1 major battle --- 42nd at Ticonderoga and Bushy Run; Royal Americans (60th regiment foot) at Bushy Run, Battle of Quebec, and Grant's Defeat; 77th at Bushy Run and Grant's Defeat. Our own beloved 44th was at BoM and Ticonderoga, so ------
 
Last edited:
HI KEN....Whatever line J.J.comes out in the next
few months i think we will all be happy. You have
some good suggestions, it is good to hear of
different battles that went on, it stirs up our
imagination for different dioramas big or small.
HAVE A GOOD DAY KEN.
 
I need to ask this question.Wasn't the Virginia Regt.'s uniform for the 1754 battles and the BOM red?
Mark
 
I need to ask this question.Wasn't the Virginia Regt.'s uniform for the 1754 battles and the BOM red?
Mark

The "Wounding of Braddock" painting has Washington in a red uniform.
 
Yes that's what made me question the color of the uniform.I read somewhere that the Va.regt. was changing their uniform around this time.
Mark
 
After Ft. Necessity fiasco, Washington retired from the militia, but was then invited to be an aide-de-camp for Braddock, so it would make sense that he would have a red uniform, being an aide in the British army. I think the confusion comes in of the famous painting of Washington wearing his blue uniform, being that it was painted in 1772. And it was his FIW blue uniform that he wore to the Continental Congress, until they elected him commander-in-chief, I guess he wanted to show he was serious. Not sure about the whole regiment though, I think you're right about them changing their uniforms at this time, when they officially became the Virginia Blues.
 
After Ft. Necessity fiasco, Washington retired from the militia, but was then invited to be an aide-de-camp for Braddock, so it would make sense that he would have a red uniform, being an aide in the British army. I think the confusion comes in of the famous painting of Washington wearing his blue uniform, being that it was painted in 1772. And it was his FIW blue uniform that he wore to the Continental Congress, until they elected him commander-in-chief, I guess he wanted to show he was serious. Not sure about the whole regiment though, I think you're right about them changing their uniforms at this time, when they officially became the Virginia Blues.

That makes sense. There is also a fellow in the traditional VA uniform in the picture. Maybe Stewart. I'm too lazy to look it up tonight, but here is the picture:
 

Attachments

  • WoundingBraddock_z.jpg
    WoundingBraddock_z.jpg
    89 KB · Views: 495
The first uniform for the regiment was conceived of as almost an afterthought while the newly formed regiment was recruiting and collecting provisions for its first campaign to oust the French from the Forks of the Ohio in 1754. In March, Washington remarked upon the poor state of clothing for the regiment and requested Dinwiddie to provide a uniform for the soldiers (Brock, v.1, 92). Later in the month a uniform consisting of "a Coat and Breeches of red Cloth" (Brock, v.1, 116) was decided upon. However, it seems that not enough uniforms were obtained on such short notice, because as late as June 28 (Washington surrendered at Fort Necessity on July 3) uniforms were still being sent from Alexandria (Abbot v.1, 153-54). Therefore only part of the regiment wore the red coat, while many of the rest had checked shirts, and apparently the pants in which they arrived to the service (Abbot, v.1, 141). In a 1757 letter to the new commander of British forces in America, Lord Loudoun, Washington stated that "the first Twelve Months of their [the soldiers] Service they received no clothing" (Abbot, v.4, 86). Washington’s comment indicates that the regiment had no real uniform in 1754.

Therefore it appears that the real first uniform followed the color scheme of blue with red facings; a scheme that was followed for the regiment’s entire existence. This uniform was ordered and purchased in London through John Hanbury in the fall of 1754 and arrived in March of 1755, in time for the regiment to leave Will’s Creek (Fort Cumberland) with General Edward Braddock on the ill-fated Fort Duquesne campaign. In spite of no order for the making of the uniforms having yet been found, there are a couple of hints that lead to a conclusion that this first uniform was blue. One, is a reference of Captain Robert Orme’s, in a description of the Battle of the Monongahela, to the "Virginia blues". The other reference is in a letter from Governor Dinwiddie to Captain Robert Stewart on 26 November 1754 advising him to purchase "some cheap blue Clothing" for his men while they await the arrival of the uniforms from Britain (Brock, v.1, 413). The quality of this first uniform seems to have been something less than the expectations for a standard uniform, for Washington described this uniform to Lord Loudoun as "a suit of thin sleazy Cloth without lining, and without Waistcoats except of sorry Flannel" (Abbot, v.4, 86).

When the Regiment was reorganized after the Braddock campaign with Washington as its colonel, the first orders concerning the uniform are extant. The regimental is ordered blue with red facings, a red waistcoat, and blue breeches. However, approximately one and one-half years would pass before the soldiers received their uniforms from London. The timing was fortuitous because they arrived just as several companies were to leave for Charles Town, South Carolina to act in conjunction with the British. These uniforms were apparently impressive to the British officers because the Virginia officers received several compliments on the appearance and bearing of their soldiers (Abbot, v.4, 373).

It appears that the regiment was kept in good uniforms for the remainder of their service, except during the 1758 Fort Duquesne campaign. Because their old uniforms were literally worn out, and the new ones had not arrived from England, the regiment was authorized by General John Forbes to wear Indian clothing (hunting shirts, breechcloths, and wool leggings) for the campaign. The new uniforms arrived before the end of the campaign, just as the colder fall weather was setting in. Deserter notices describing the regimental as late as May 1762 advertise a deserter having "a blue Coat, turnup with red", thus making it likely that the regiment used the red on blue color scheme from 1754 to 1762 (Pennsylvania Gazette, 29 July 1762).
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top