The general view of infantry at the start of the 18th century was that they were primarily about firepower, and efforts were made to maximise that as much as possible. Regardless of nationality, they would be lined up in ranks and made to fire at their opponents until, ideally, their opponents yielded and perhaps withdrew, at which point cavalry would be unleashed upon them to destroy them or at least confirm their defeat. Bayonets were issued, as were swords, but these were mainly defensive weapons, particularly against cavalry, so it was not common for infantry to charge and engage an enemy in the way the figures in this set are doing. Having said all that of course, such circumstances did sometimes occur, particularly if the fighting was in an urban area where cavalry would find the task more difficult, or were unavailable, so for those particularly dramatic breakthroughs Strelets offer this set ‘in attack’.

There is much uncertainty about when troops might fix bayonets, since a bayonet, even though of the socket variety, had an effect on the handling of the musket. Equally, should the infantry be required to chase an enemy or fight hand-to-hand, how often would they use the bayonet, and how often the sword? This set provides several poses using both weapons, with many advancing with bayonet fixed, or apparently engaged in hand-to-hand combat. There is more variety than usual because the set is largely focused on just this activity, and in general the poses are fine. Three of the poses hold their musket, including attached bayonet, in the left hand, while brandishing their sword in the right (two in the second row and the last man in row three), and these caused us pause for thought. While this sort of pose has been done before, we did wonder if their ability to effectively use the sword would be diminished by having to hold the long and very sharp musket/bayonet in the other hand. Using both weapons in combination seems very unlikely, and modern authors tend to suggest the sword was of very basic quality and mainly useful for chopping wood, threatening civilians etc., so we do wonder how often soldiers actually drew their swords in anger like this when in battle. They do look dramatic it must be said, whether or not they were a common sight on the battlefield.

The four command poses are certainly far from typical, although it is likely that Strelets will make several sets on this subject, which does make room for some more unusual poses. The first is an NCO, probably a sergeant, and his is by far the most normal of the command poses as he simply shouts to his men. Beside him is a drummer that has clearly been hit by something as he reels backwards, and the ensign next to him is also falling sideways and is letting go of his staff as his hat starts to topple from his head, so while it is unusual to have command poses that are also casualties, both work very well, though more conventional choices will hopefully be made available in future sets. The officer is very strange however, because he holds both a sword and a pistol. As in any army, the role of the officers is to lead and control the men, not to engage individuals with their personal weapons, so having one apparently doing just that with his sword is unusual enough. That he carries a pistol in his left hand makes him quite remarkable, both because using it whilst also holding a sword would be difficult, and because we can find no evidence that infantry officers walked about the battlefield carrying them. Pistols were of course essentially one-shot weapons, and only good for extremely close range, so it is hard to see why an officer would choose to take one with him.

The uniform of these figures follows the conventions of early 18th century uniform, which were not much different from civilian dress. The men all wear the characteristic tricorn, which has a cockade on the left side but seems to be missing the field sign commonly worn by Austrian infantry. The single-breasted coat has no collar or lapels, but has large cuffs and falls to around the knees, which looks fine. The shirt and waistcoat underneath are mostly hidden, as are the breeches and stockings, as all of these men wear the long gaiters which cover the whole of the lower legs, covering the tops of the shoes as well. The sergeant is much the same, although he has his coat open, and the coats of the musician, ensign and officer are the same but with much more decoration. The ensign and officer wear a full wig, and have a sash around the waist, and the officer also has a cuirass under his coat, which is an interesting feature.

The muskets all look to be flintlocks, and all have a bayonet attached. The NCO has a halberd of a style as might be held by a sergeant, and the rest of the command figures have swords as their sole personal weapon. The troops too have swords as we have said (straight ones, meaning they are in a ‘German’ regiment), which hang from a waistbelt, and where visible this belt also supports the bayonet scabbard, in which there lies a second bayonet, so many will want to alter those figures to ensure they have just one bayonet, either fixed or sheathed. They also have a cartridge pouch held by a belt over the left shoulder, but there is no other equipment, which presumably was put aside prior to going into the attack.

The drum looks pretty good to us, and the flag staff is okay too. It is 48 mm (346 cm) to the extremities, with about 25 mm clear for affixing a flag, which is not supplied. This is just enough to add a flag of reasonable size, at least for later in the period when the earlier examples of 2.2 metres or so seem to have been replaced by smaller ones. Not providing an actual flag solves some problems for the manufacturer, but also allows greater flexibility for the customer, so we like to see this approach.

The sculpting is very nice, and shows lots of detail if at times a little less slender than would have been ideal. The figures are at times rather awkward, so the first in the top row has a strangely twisted body, the second in that row leans considerably to the right, and the first in the third row is very flat, with running legs that are behind each other. However the flattest pose is the middle man in the second row, who holds his sword next to the muzzle of his musket, which looks fine in our image but is very odd from any other angle. Also the officer’s sword scabbard is clearly held from his waist belt under his coat, but is positioned at the centre of his lower back, where it would be impossible to reach, and not easy even if you took the coat off completely. On the privates we found almost no flash, but the command figures have rather more, including the very large sheet seen on the right side of the sergeant in our photo.

Despite attempts at standardisation, there were many differences between units and individuals within the Imperial Army, but these figures are reasonably typical, particularly for later in the period as matchlocks, and then powder horns, gradually disappeared. All these flintlocks have a sling, so these are technically fusiliers, and there are no grenadiers in this set, so it does not cover all parts of the Imperial infantry, but that is fine as it leaves room for a good range of poses instead. Those advancing or engaging with their muskets and bayonets are good poses, but the middle figure in the second row seems pretty awkward to us, and the officer with drawn sword and pistol in hand just looks wrong for the period. Aside from those two poses, we thought these are decent figures that will certainly bring some life and energy into a display of such troops.