# Talk:52nd (Oxfordshire) Regiment of Foot

Perhaps my edit summary wasn't entirely accurate in referring to WP:PEACOCK; at any rate, I think the new sentence is more neutral. Olaf Davis | Talk 09:29, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you.  This is a work in progress, and it is good to have  other eyes  looking over things; you were right to change that sentence: it is much better now.  Gwinva (talk) 19:41, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Issues relating to the 52nd during the Indian wars discussed at the reference desk.  Gwinva (talk) 00:14, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Removed transclusion, but review can be found at  Talk:52nd (Oxfordshire) Regiment of Foot/GA1 Gwinva (talk) 02:42, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

San Sebastien medal

"They were the first regular regiment to be so designated'- Not so. If one discounts the short-lived regiments of the Seven Years War- most notably Gage's 80th, the 90th Regiment (Perthshire Volunteers)formed in 1794 must be considered as the first corps raised and trained as Light infantry. For quick reference see- 
http://www.lightinfantry.org.uk/regiments/perth/perth_timline.htm 
"regular regiments were required to include one company of light infantry from 1758'. Light Companies were introduced throughout the Infantry in 1770. (See below) and lasted till 1858-60 when flank coys were done away with. 
"Light infantry dress has its origins in the American War of Independence, when uniforms were altered to allow ease in the field. "Wings", similar to those worn by grenadiers, were added to the shoulders and lacing was dispensed with, to make the quick removal of coats possible." This is neither coherent nor correct. Are you referring to the light infantry clothing adopted in North America, which first emerged during the Seven Years War, or to Light Infantry uniform, which appeared after Light Companies were attached to Line Infantry in 1770? The latter made a nod to the modifications made in North America but was hardly more practical than a Line soldiers uniform.
The 'Wings' prescribed for the Light companies in 1770-71 were not added for convenience, but rather to denote their status as select Flank Company men. On the contrary, it  would have increased ease of movement when in 1777, if not earlier, both Light and Line companies in America began to wear jackets probably cut down from coats from which shoulder 'wings' had been removed. The wings were replaced when the war ended, regulation dress was restored and 'proper soldiering' could be resumed. It was an evolution of this uniform which the Light Infantry regiments wore in 1803 by which time it was the same in essence as the Line Infantry uniform and neither more or less practical. 
(Wings of a  sort were prescribed for Light Infantry coats in America during the Seven Years war but these were more of a rain cape as in a stockman's raincoat cf.'Drizabone')
The bugle horn had been the badge of light infantry regiments since 1770- You may have meant 'light infantry companies', though at this date use of the bugle horn as a distinctive emblem among British Light Companies appears to have been rare, for instance the 5th Regiment in North America c.1775. One of the earliest examples at regimental level is on a cap of the 90th Regiment c.1794-1801(See above).
See- Michael Barthorp, 'Light Infantry Caps 1770-1799' in 'Military Illustrated: Past and Present', No.29 October 1990.
The red coat remained standard uniform for the British Army until khaki was introduced as standard in 1885 -Not so. Check your 'British Infantry Uniforms',Barthorp. In 1885 Khaki Drill was prescribed for regiments in India in all orders except Full Dress. A khaki Foreign Service Dress was prescribed for Home Service battalions in 1896. Only in 1902 was a khaki Service Dress prescribed for the British Army as a whole.JF42 (talk) 09:06, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointers.  I'll go over these when I get a chance. Gwinva (talk) 03:38, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

The section on the American War of Independence appears to be short on details; it does not mention some of the actions listed in the infobox.  Essentially all of 1776 and 1777, how it participated in the New York, New Jersey, and Philadelphia campaigns, is missing description.  I know they were in the Battle of Long Island (August 1776) and in the Battle of Forts Clinton and Montgomery (October 1777).  The latter makes me wonder whether they actually served in the Philadelphia campaign, since they (or a portion of) would have had to be in the New York garrison to participate in that, while Howe's main army was in Philadelphia.  (I'm not familiar in detail with the Philadelphia campaign.)
Some minor nits: the place they were shipped from (presumably in 1773 or 1774, but this is not stated) was actually called Quebec at the time; "Canada", while a widely-used contemporary epithet, did not actually exist then, being an obsolete reference to Canada, New France.  (They also didn't go to "America", probably best to just say they went to Boston, then in the Province of Massachusetts Bay.) Magic♪piano 00:34, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on 52nd (Oxfordshire) Regiment of Foot. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.lightinfantry.org.uk/regiments/obli/ox_colonels.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080930202752/http://www.army.mod.uk/lightinfantry/history_traditions/dress_drill_customs_traditions/regimental_dress/the_bugle_horn.htm to http://www2.army.mod.uk/lightinfantry/history_traditions/dress_drill_customs_traditions/regimental_dress/the_bugle_horn.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081216071449/http://gaslight.mtroyal.ab.ca/waterloo.htm to http://gaslight.mtroyal.ab.ca/waterloo.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:12, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

The French....frequently used multi-shot and grapeshot in their muskets 
'grapeshot' is an artillery munition, so this assertion can have  no basis in fact.
JF42 (talk) 15:21, 24 June 2021 (UTC)