During the later 17th century, Imperial Habsburg (i.e. ‘Austrian’) armies were always composed of at least one third cavalry, since this was a particularly effective arm when dealing with the light and mobile Ottomans, and when operating in the difficult Hungarian countryside. The numbers of dragoons and later hussars would steadily grow, but it was the cuirassiers that remained the core of the mounted arm, offering shock troops that were particularly effective at pursuing a routed enemy. However, the normal Imperial battle tactic was similar to that of the French, which was to approach close to the enemy, discharge pistols and muskets, and then advance on the now hopefully disordered troops with cold steel in hand. This theoretically low-risk but undramatic tactic was developed to oppose more numerous and more mobile Ottoman opponents, but was also used against western enemies, although there the full-on charge seems to have been practised on at least some occasions.

In western Europe the fashion was to move away from the heavily armoured horseman after the Thirty Years War, and while many still wore the cuirass itself, other armour and helmets gradually disappeared. The look of the figures in this set is, however, little different from that of 1648, as all the troopers still wear the ‘lobster-pot’ helmet, with its articulated neck protection and movable face guard. While Imperial cuirassiers would also follow the fashion, it took much longer as they still saw value in this armour when facing the Ottomans, and it was recommended at the time that the helmet be worn in the East, while the modern tricorn (perhaps with metal ‘secret’ protection underneath) be worn in the West. Doubtless this was a gradual process, and there is no information on exactly when the change was complete, but it seems likely that the helmet as seen here was still in use in the early 1700s. However, bearing in mind that Strelets have so far made sets for the War of the Spanish Succession, it seems very unlikely that men dressed this way participated in that later conflict, since much of their area of operations was in Italy and the upper Danube. Nevertheless, for the years prior to that major conflict, and especially on the eastern front, these helmets are accurate.

The rest of the uniform is made up principally of the coat, which could be either a leather buff coat or the later fabric coat. All these figures have the large cuffs, which were fashionable in the early 18th century, and while this might argue against the buff coat, in fact such coats did indeed have them, although opinion is divided as to whether the cuffs were on a garment underneath or were a detachable item added to the coat sleeve. All the men wear gauntlets, which is fine, but we notice that these look to be rather awkward as they interfere with the cuffs, which was probably also true of the real thing. The coat is of course partly concealed by the chest and back plates of the armour (which would normally be blackened metal but could possibly also be painted leather), and the men also wear the classic high boots with turned down top that provided important protection for the legs and knees. The officer figure (last figure in third row) wears a sash round the waist, and lacks a firearm or ammunition pouch, and the same is true of the standard-bearer. The splendid kettle-drummer, also in our third row, has a completely different uniform, as was so often the case with musicians of that and many other ages. He wears a coat which would have been highly decorated, possibly in the livery of the colonel, and includes the traditional false sleeves. His headdress looks to be made of fur or fabric, and sports a large plume, which matches illustrations of the time. Some have suggested that this may be a parade uniform, but we see no good reason why it might not also be seen on the battlefield. The large cuffs of the men mean the uniform they wear dates from around 1680, and as we have said, was probably still to be seen in certain theatres until perhaps as late as 1710.

The equipment these men carry begins with the long straight heavy sword, held in a scabbard slung from a waist belt. Prior to c.1680 this would have been held by a baldric, so again this is a small detail that helps to date the figures. The men also have an ammunition pouch held on a belt over the shoulder, and another such belt holds their shortened musket. All have also correctly been armed with a brace of pistols, stowed at the front of the saddle, and a circular valise is attached to the rear, so all the basic equipment is here and properly done.

The poses of the men look mostly to be in action, with a variety of poses holding either sword, pistol or musket. The sword poses are particularly pleasing, including several with the sword pointed directly ahead in a nice, aggressive stance, although it is the charge rather than close-quarter combat that is the theme here. Those with musket or pistol are not actually firing their weapon, which is a bit of a shame as that would have been a very useful pose, given the usual tactic of firing before the charge, but it is important that these weapons are as well represented as they are. The drummer and ensign are fine, but we particularly liked the officer, who seems to be turning to his side as if to shout orders or encouragement to his men.

The horses will be familiar to many as they are the same as those found in several earlier sets of French cavalry for the War of Spanish Succession from Strelets, which does however give us a problem. While the style of saddles, bridles etc looks reasonable, all the poses are clearly moving forward, some at a great speed, which makes for a great charge, but less than ideal partners for the men in this set. First, and most obvious, those with pistol or musket in hand would be unlikely to be charging forward at full gallop, and some animals more or less stopped would be very useful as a rank prepared to give fire. Also, even once the firing was done and the sword drawn, the troops would be very close to the enemy (effective range, particularly for the pistol, was very short indeed), so the final thrust would be at no more than a trot, which is not what most of these horses are doing. Clearly reusing horses like this saves effort and cost, but it means they are less than ideal for the troops here, though of course enterprising customers might replace the horses from other sets.

The slightly chunky Strelets style works particularly well with these heavy cavalry figures, and there is the usual good amount of detail on show, especially around the helmets, which are very nicely done. The slightly thicker swords mean they do not look quite as long as they should, and the same goes for the short muskets, but such things are always a compromise, and these are by no means bad. Unfortunately, one man has completely lost his scabbard, perhaps for moulding reasons, but generally the figures look very good. The horses are not quite in the same league, and some of the poses are not so great, although it is the legs that gave us the most concern as some have a rough finish to them, especially at the mould seam. Also, we found the detail of the saddles was much less distinct on the right side (ironically, the side not visible in our photos), and the horses suffer more than the men from flash or apparent imperfections in the mould. The only significant flash on the men is on one of the kettle-drums, but we found the fit between man and horse was often quite poor, and would need careful work to make for a proper fit.

The guidon being carried here is unengraved and about 11 mm square, which equates to about 79 cm, which is on the high side of acceptable by some authorities, although Hall says the guidon should only be about 48 cm square. However, it is nicely done with the fringe and cords, as is the staff. The drummer was a highlight for us, with really nice banners round the drums, but the set lacks a trumpeter (for which the Bavarian set could provide the answer). The sculpting is very nice (more so for the men than the horses), but the horse poses are not the best choices (again, the Bavarian set can help here). We would have liked to have seen some actual firing going on, rather than the emphasis on a full charge, but there is nothing wrong with the poses as provided, which include some appealing action options. Accuracy is very good, although of course there will be some customers that were hoping for figures for the famous Danube campaign of 1704, which this set probably does not provide, but the campaigns in Hungary and beyond are perfectly suited to these men. The figures are a little on the tall side, but the ill-fit between man and horse is the one disappointment in an otherwise very passable collection of cuirassiers.