Occasionally very tiny mixed groups of Peter Laing figures turn up on auction sites or second hand figure sales websites. Sometimes the figures are identified, sometimes not.
I recently bought a group of 18 mixed foot and 2 cavalry – but only recognise a few of them.
Maybe the Google plus Peter Laing group or my blog readers could help me identify these figures?
Some of the native figures may be Mahdists or Dervishes with spear and sword ? Or are they Boxers? These two groups were interchangeable in the Peter Laing range, even appearing as “Suitable Items from Other Ranges” within the same range where Peter suggested F628 Dervish with Spear could be Boxer with Spear.
Ross MacFarlane suggested in the comments: “The others look like Mahdists to me. F612, F628, F629. Your pigtail is probably the tail of the turban which was often left to dangle down the neck. The armoured cavalry looks like M608 Armoured Dervish cavalry. Thanks, Ross!
Ian Dury wrote: Just to confirm Ross’ views on the Colonial and Crimean figures – they are indeed:
F612 (Mahdist) Jihadia rifeleman
F628 Dervish with spear
F628 Dervish with raised sword
M608 Dervish Armoured Horseman
A806 Russian Gunner, sponge
A807 Russian Gunner, Portfire
A few have some paintwork, suggestive of the colourful patches of Dervishes.
The few details on these tiny 15mm figures made them very versatile for paint conversions to other periods or armies.
A few I already recognise like the Zulu, probably F620 advancing raised assegai or F626 Zulu running.
Ross MacFarlane thinks: “The armoured cavalry looks like M608 Armoured Dervish cavalry” which makes more sense in the colonial company it is keeping. I thought at first it might be weird Mounted Norman …
Any help identifying this small random group of Peter Laing figures is much appreciated.
B.P.S. Blog Post Script – Prussian or Russian?
In his comment, Ross thinks that the infantryman has the look of a Crimean Russian infantryman, rather than Prussian Landwehr. This is a sensible suggestion with it being lumped in with stray Crimean Russian gunners.
This would probably make it F824 Russian infantry advancing (cap)?
Hopefully someone with Waterloo Prussian or Crimean Russian Peter Laing figures might have thoughts on this.
Ian Dury’s fine collection of Peter Laing Crimean Russian figures in caps advancing are shown here on Bob Cordery’s blog
http://wargamingmiscellany.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/in-praise-of-peter-laing-miniatures_3.html
Just as the Russian gunner figures look like they have long coats and /or baggy breeches, these figures in Ian’s photographs look to have slightly longer baggy coats. We are only talking a difference of up to a millimetre!
The new unpainted figure is so close to one that I bought from Peter Laing as samples of his Waterloo range in the 1980s that I think the figures, if not the same, are pretty much interchangeable – a bonus really for building up an army!
I photographed my Waterloo Prussians alongside for comparison.
…
The full extent of my Prussian intervention in a Waterloo setting is currently shown here – tremble, tiny Napoleon!
I am still slightly swayed towards the figure being Napoleonic Prussian rather than Crimean Russian. However it is close enough to the Crimean Russian figures in Ian Dury’s photographs that, thanks to Ross’s suggestion, I could easily use these Landwehr type figures for Crimean War scenarios.
Blogposted by Mark, Man of TIN, 17 September 2017
Man of Tin blog 
The artillerymen in the top picture are Russian Crimean War figures , with rammer and porte fire , Tony
LikeLike
Tony
Thanks for your help – a suspicion confirmed. That’s the start of my Russian Crimean army then. I have a few Highlanders already, start of a very small thin red line!
Mark, Man of TIN
LikeLike
Testing resting 1…2….3 I think I may have found a new way to comment, responding to an email notification rather than on site.
The artillery in the first picture are Crimean Russian, that is a portfire. However, from here, it looks to me like your Landwehr might actually be a Crimean Russian infantryman in turned back greatcoat and forage cap though.
The others look like Mahdists to me. F612, 628,629. Your pigtail is probably the tail of the turban which was often left to dangle down the neck. The armoured cavalry looks like M608 Armoured Dervish cavalry (they used to be common wargame figures but are now seen to have been a mistaken identification of occasional Emirs)
PS I love this sort of exercise, best in person but even on line.
Ross
LikeLike
Ross
Thanks very much for all your ID suggestions and help. I think I shall find a paint scheme where my few Mahdists can double as Boxers, as Peter suggested in his catalogue, until reinforcements arrive – part of the joy of Peter Laing figures.
Similarly you now have me wondering about my Prussian or Russian, so I will photograph both tonight with my Waterloo Prussians.
Mark Man of TIN
LikeLike
Hi Mark – Just to confirm Ross’ views on the Colonial and Crimean figures – they are indeed:
F612 (Mahdist) Jihadia rifeleman
F628 Dervish with spear
F628 Dervish with raised sword
M608 Dervish Armoured Horseman
A806 Russian Gunner, sponge
A807 Russian Gunner, Portfire
The other figure though is a Napoleonic Prussian Landwehr Advancing, F15. By comparison, the Crimean Russian has an ankle length coat and a smaller pack. I haven’t got any good close up pictures of one at the moment, but I will take some
Ian
LikeLike
Thanks Ian (and to Ross and Tony) for your help with ID and to have my speculations confirmed. Interesting new little bunch of figures to paint up. The Russian / Prussian similarity is useful for doubling up figures with limited forces.
Mark, Man of TIN
LikeLike