Forum Replies Created

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 846 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Buckler’s Hard, Historic Riverside Village #200618
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    The Royal Navy m’lud is innocent.

    Yebbut, that doesn’t mean that you can’t use the fact that the RN cut down a few trees to take a gratuitous post-colonial swipe at the UK. 🙂

    Woof

    in reply to: Buckler’s Hard, Historic Riverside Village #200611
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    A ‘hard’ is just a flat firm area by water that’s useful for dragging ships out of the water. Unlikely they’d need foreign timber at Buckler’s Hard. Its location in the New Forest is a clue.

    Ok then.

    However our country was pillaged, I mean harvested of straight trunk trees for the Royal Navy, so why wouldn’t they have reached there??
    My family had a seaside property where there used to exist in 19thC a half mile long pier where the timbers were transported to ships tied up there – literally sometimes, as it was very shallow at low tide, on the Kaipara…

    in reply to: Spoiling your fun with Russians (v2) #200609
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    I try to scoop up any books on 1812 Russian Campaign, maybe Bagration biography would be a good read next. Working on Waterloo Casualties now.

    There fixed that for ya!
    I admire your dedication, but I considered like 1815; 1812 is a singular construct of aberrant actions where practically both sides dont know anything about the presence of the other.

    Literally like the flat plane board games that you enjoy- they wandered around in a space so vast, costing so many lives and for so little ‘decision’. Sure there were battles, but I don’t like the geo-politics that drove it from the start.

    Yes I liked Mikaberidzes thesis on Bagration so no doubt allied material?
    cheers dave

    in reply to: Russian Infantry Flags of the Napoleonic Wars #200583
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Part Trois

    A cross referencing update as I lost this thread…

    OotKust wrote: Well,… I knew nothing about this thread! Tripped across musing about some 1799 unit… Have ordered

    MY UPDATE is:-

    Despite contact with publisher I did not receive the books after order and due payment, plus added ‘postage’ costs…

    Well that was, until 4 months AFTER the attempted charge and despatch date. Seems the penguins got lost on their return journey to the South Pole.

    However, having overcome my extreme disappointment in the interim, (noting no refund of post was offered even)!

    Both books are amazing! The clean layout and structure of both the Infantry AND the Flags book are simply superb. Scholarly by scholars!

    Clearly defined with quite a few sidebars for consideration, both authors explain the complexities and handicaps of their works. Given those warnings, one can better understand the notations made further along.

    For the infantry we get the timelines before Alexander, since he took over a living organism, the Regiments by name and details of uniforms specifically. Not only notes on all regiments, but changes, swaps of Inspections or Divisions, penalties and punitive actions, as well as conversions to other types of infantry. All clearly based in single chapters and along timelines well understood. Also includes the basics and a few examples of ‘banners’.

    Also clearly explained are the ‘proxy’ corps being established from 1810-1813 once a rupture with France was more than obvious (Alexander had spy’s in Napoleons government copying his orders!).

    Thus the reorganisation of Garrison regiments into ‘line; redeployment of ‘depot’ companies and the ad-hoc situation of old regiments (Musketeer Regiment etc) and new (Infantry Regiment)- both using the same territorial designation.

    Banners for all these are shown where possible.

    For the flags/ banners again we get the timelines before Alexander- but importantly the entire 1797 issues under Paul I since he replaced every single item such was his hatred of his mothers efforts on the army!

    The 3 types of primary issue- 1797, 1800/ 1803 and 1806/ 1813 are explained, additions and changes shown per regiment. Thus all incorporate up to 3 designated changes between 1801 and 1815 proper.

    Annexes show the prior artwork under Catherine and compare in some instances the similarity with Crimean War artwork.

    All in all I can now identify every standard I need to create for each regiment, for both 1805 AND 1813, and will perhaps do some 1799 versions as well for Suvorovs final campaign in Italy!

    It appears the books still exist at the publishers, I just hope you don’t suffer the angst and inconvenience I had too…

    regards
    -dave

    in reply to: Spoiling your fun with Russians (v2) #200582
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    A cross referencing update as I lost this thread…

    Well,… I knew nothing about this thread! Tripped across musing about some 1799 unit… Have ordered both the ‘Flags’ and ‘Infantry’ books from Caliver, after seeing the examples given. May as well spend my pension on something more interesting… 🙂 Thanks for all your efforts and dedication Mr. Prince! regards davew

    MY UPDATE is:-

    Despite contact with publisher I did not receive the books after order and due payment, plus added ‘postage’ costs…

    Well that was, until 4 months AFTER the attempted charge and despatch date. Seems the penguins got lost on their return journey to the South Pole.

    However, having overcome my extreme disappointment in the interim, (noting no refund of post was offered even)!

    Both books are amazing! The clean layout and structure of both the Infantry AND the Flags book are simply superb. Scholarly by scholars!

    Clearly defined with quite a few sidebars for consideration, both authors explain the complexities and handicaps of their works. Given those warnings, one can better understand the notations made further along.

    For the infantry we get the timelines before Alexander, since he took over a living organism, the Regiments by name and details of uniforms specifically. Not only notes on all regiments, but changes, swaps of Inspections or Divisions, penalties and punitive actions, as well as conversions to other types of infantry. All clearly based in single chapters and along timelines well understood. Also includes the basics and a few examples of ‘banners’.

    Also clearly explained are the ‘proxy’ corps being established from 1810-1813 once a rupture with France was more than obvious (Alexander had spy’s in Napoleons government copying his orders!).

    Thus the reorganisation of Garrison regiments into ‘line; redeployment of ‘depot’ companies and the ad-hoc situation of old regiments (Musketeer Regiment etc) and new (Infantry Regiment)- both using the same territorial designation.

    Banners for all these are shown where possible.

    For the flags/ banners again we get the timelines before Alexander- but importantly the entire 1797 issues under Paul I since he replaced every single item such was his hatred of his mothers efforts on the army!

    The 3 types of primary issue- 1797, 1800/ 1803 and 1806/ 1813 are explained, additions and changes shown per regiment. Thus all incorporate up to 3 designated changes between 1801 and 1815 proper.

    Annexes show the prior artwork under Catherine and compare in some instances the similarity with Crimean War artwork.

    All in all I can now identify every standard I need to create for each regiment, for both 1805 AND 1813, and will perhaps do some 1799 versions as well for Suvorovs final campaign in Italy!

    It appears the books still exist at the publishers, I just hope you don’t suffer the angst and inconvenience I had too…

    regards
    -dave

    in reply to: [1800] Army of the Rhine- Moreau #200580
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Germany as a Theatre- 1796-1800 and 1805

    A note after reading (well scanning in) the rather extensive new post by M. Berjaud recently on http://frederic.berjaud.free.fr/024edeLigne/24e_de_ligne.htm and it’s organisational history*.

    A number of points raised my interest, and conclusions.

    Despite the response of N. in 1805 to Austrian aggression- by that self-determined ‘invasion’ of ‘friendly Bavaria’ [another N. mistruth? -Bavaria wanted no part of a dominant partner, neither East nor West], he was to put it mildly, almost completely ignorant of the country and its pathways.

    Hence 10 years after the numerous combats undertaken by Moreau in the revolutionary period, he sadly missed his detailed knowledge and skillset- all based upon what I see as unlikely allegations that Moreau was treating against him.

    Neither Bonaparte nor N. the Emperor had ever set foot on German soil. He may have been to Strasbourg, and other Rhenish towns, but I think from memory he never went further.

    Hence his need in 1805 for significant surveillance, geographical details and a spy network among the Germanic states prior to contact with the ‘designated’ enemy.

    Of course by 1805 he had all of Moreaus officers, including Ney with whom he worked closely and mutual fidelity after the effects of the coup were bedded in. Ney like others, if not radicalised outright, were separated from Moreaus influence and ‘streams’ of previous contacts and influences. Thus given posts where they with benefit of certain freedoms, could both be controlled and watched, where they became devotees of the Consul and his close proteges.

    The perception of authority and progress under relatively limited warfare for a time, were enough to close off the old alliances and forge the new ones.

    I can’t help to note that I’m sure there was underlying mistrust of Moreau simply because both he and Massena were beaten in 1799 Italy during his absence in the East- by the combined forces of Russia and Austria under Suvorov- as noted elsewhere a man as capable in strategy and grand tactical movements if not moreso than B. at the time.

    -d

    *Much of this work for the later periods is from a unique memoir and records (archives) held by the Archives départementales de la Vienne:
    « Registre de Correspondance du Chef de Bataillon Louis Gond, commandant la 24e Demi-brigade d’infanterie, an 5 à an 8 », Archives départementales de la Vienne, Cote 16 J 1/113, Mélanges Bonsergent, Carton n°2 pièce 5 etc. with supporting documentation by noted Generals and authorities of the time, as per:-
    Papiers du Général Paul Grenier. XIII. 1768-1827, BNF, Paris. A noted commanding General and an Inspector-Generale of the period who’s documented works and correspondence cannot be discounted as accurate.


    in reply to: Solo Wargamers in Literature – No Honestly! #200576
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Never read it – heard lots about it. Sounds fundamentally flawed. Who creates the list corresponding to the dice rolls?

    It’s all in his head maan…..

    and choices were, like hits, from extreme to extreme… IIRC _

    in reply to: Buckler’s Hard, Historic Riverside Village #200575
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Looks great!
    Coming from a maritime (ie island) nation of tiny proportions, I’m sure I’d cope with such a museum, had I even known it existed. Wonder if they used any of the 3000 odd (I read…), 100-200 YEARS OLD  140 foot+ tall Kauri trees taken from nz in the 18th and 19thC?

    However, despite being a colonial and raised under a default Westminster system, I do lack an understanding of ‘British’ naming and conventions.

    Here it’s either a well-known Brit, sometimes Dutch or French named locale; others if not ‘colony’ wise important, would be native names adopted as we grew.

    British English, just don’t get it… don’t start on Welsh or Gaellic!
    -d

    in reply to: Austria- Naps + #200547
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    A Model? A Prototype? If only I knew…

    I don’t know whether such clamours for information are bait for more ad-impressions on web sites, or desultory woefulness in wanting to use archaic figure ranges (like me).

    Someone asks what the ‘calibres’ are- “in the Napoleonic 25mm Minifigs range for  NFA 16 Austrian Field Gun and NFA 17 Russian Field Gun”. Wrong question, as most systems used ‘poundage’ (weight of projectiles etc.) than calibres. Easy eh?

    Down to Dick and co for not being precise in identifying these pieces- given the extraordinary detail of some of this and other ranges. However the first respondent gets it pretty much correct, citing both the ‘common’ catalogue (1980) and some other source lists, but not having seen the ‘Russian’ model in over 20 years, I’m unsure whether 6pdr or 12pdr is correct.

    However arguing the point isn’t worth it- the Austrian is only a Wurst Cavalry 6pdr, there were no other types! Yes there was the 7pdr Howitzer- both contemporaries of the foot brothers. But Minifigs don’t and didn’t make the howitzer (would have been an easy supplement if you ask me!).

    The retort was that

    “The NFA 17 Russian Field Gun is a 12pdr, and would NOT be appropriate for use as an Austrian field gun. And the Reference NFA 16 Austrian Field Gun is a 3pdrs…

    Well in the past I’ve been through this exact exercise- I’m using some Russian 6x and 12x as Austrian guns, because in my case Hinchliffe (same vintage- 1970s) didn’t make ANY Austrian ordnance either. If you don’t have what is ‘accurate’, stand-ins will do!
    As for a ‘reference’ citing that the Wurst cannon is a ‘3x’- he’s dreaming.

    I’m currently building the Perry pair of Austrian ordnance, in contemplation of a full fit out for these unique looking batteries.

    Per Minifigs Austrian-

    And the Russian, I presume-

    Someone may confirm is approximation by size?
    cheers d

    in reply to: Varnish Protocol #200545
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Same as most. End of line painting; then basing/ scenics, then matt spray all including the scenics to ‘fix’ in place.

    When is important- never in same week as painting; at low humidity conditions, preferably warm dry sunshine (yes its done outside) and figures stay out there for at least an hour or so.

    Also to avoid blotchy spray, I keep the cans in our hot water cupboard (you know linen??) so they are warmed up before the spray process. Ditto if Winter like now and 5ºC outside, figures sit on a sunny window shelf to allow spray to adhere to ‘warmer’ figures etc.

    d

    in reply to: Solo Wargamers in Literature – No Honestly! #200544
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Interesting. Werry interesting…

    It may be a psychological step to the left – but have you forgotten ‘The Dice Man’? Auth. Luke Rheinhart or some such.

    Using the ultimate gamers tool, he re-imagines life going into different events- and a la gaming, lets the die decide. So solo applies in principle; other things that I can’t recall any more.

    Pretty sure I picked it up in 70s while scouring book shops for those British ‘historical’ repeats of warfare and seafaring in distant ages…

    ~dave

    in reply to: I’m not sure- ‘Battle for Paris’ #200454
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    I got the sarcasm OotKust :p

    Happily.
    On the topic- I don’t see a plan that’s constant with these books- haphazard and erratic is unfortunate IMO and has increased (dont know when these texts were ‘written’ as such) but the scaleable malice has caused the crowd to grow impatient and worried, antagonising your audience, a la some so-called comedians.

    I’m merely adding my flexible stance on the latest outpouring.. what are authors aims or desires, vs actually wealth/ income, isn’t in my purview.
    Thanks

    in reply to: I’m not sure- ‘Battle for Paris’ #200358
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    ….The above comments are crass, obtuse constructions and simplisticly incorrect.…

    So glad to be corrected.

    Wasnt meaning you- others… I just couldnt be assed quoting tripe, sorry, eloquence in swine delivery…

    in reply to: I’m not sure- ‘Battle for Paris’ #200320
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    …Money and citations my dear fellow. Which is going to generate more furore, citations, and sales “Davout betrayed Napoleon in 1814” Vs. “Hadzianestis had generally a sound understanding of what had to be done in 1922 but procrastinated too long to take action.”

    Ah, filthy lucre. Of course. Again.

    Nah, I’m not so sure.
    The above comments are crass, obtuse constructions and simplisticly incorrect.

    The same accusations could be made against capitalism in general, famous Generals and leaders, big pharma, oil and anti-ecology companies of all kinds.

    However authors very rarely achieve the claimed nirvana, until death, and I don’t see any billionaires amongst them. Hammering a stake into the heart of someone you pseudo-idolise to make money off, makes even less sense…

    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Nice treasure trove, but finding my phone translates and tablet won’t, so using phone for words and tablet for pictures.

    That’s a pain. You’re using ‘tablet’ so I presume Windows based? There should still be ‘extensions or plug-ins’ you can add to a browser to help you. I have no current knowledge on W. any more but I’ll ask a tech buddy for his thoughts.

    cheers d

     

    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Another mini-event, and a bio that I hadn’t known about before- being one of the chosen few, and effective both in his corps as Engineer and his generalship. A research thesis on –
    Witness to Glory: Lieutenant-Général Henri-Gatien Bertrand, 1791-1815.

    https://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/islandora/object/fsu%3A168940

    Abstract
    Henri-Gatien Bertrand is perhaps the least known of the generals who occupied a prestigious position near Napoleon during the years of the First French Empire. Born in 1773 to a family of the lesser nobility, Bertrand’s life encompassed all of the great and momentous events that shook France and Europe during the ensuing fifty years. He played a direct role in many of these events.

    Commissioned into the French army as an engineer officer in 1793, Bertrand served as an engineer during the siege of Metz in 1794, in the Egyptian Campaign from 1798-1801, at the camp de Boulogne from 1802-04, and during the 1809 Campaign.

    He also served as an aide-de-camp to Napoleon during the 1805, 1806, 1807, and 1808 Campaigns. In 1811, the Emperor appointed him to serve as the Governor General of the Illyrian Provinces where he remained until being recalled to the army in 1813.

    He served in the ensuing 1813 Campaign as the commander of the 4th Corps, leading his corps in the battles of Lützen, Bautzen, Gross Beeren, Dennewitz, Wartemburg, Leipzig, and Hanau. At the end of that campaign, Napoleon elevated Bertrand to the position of Grand Marshal of the Palace. Bertrand retained that position during the 1814 and 1815 Campaigns and throughout the Emperor’s exiles to Elba and St. Helena.

    He remained with Napoleon on St. Helena until the Emperor’s death in 1821. Bertrand’s service to France and Napoleon during these many years is singular for its length and the devoted manner in which he performed it. He possessed an unshakeable conviction in Napoleon’s greatness and he conducted himself in both victory and adversity in a distinguished and dignified manner that speaks highly of his character and integrity. He garnered the admiration, respect, and esteem of many for his unimpeachable service to France and Napoleon during these momentous years.

    ~d


    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Known this one for a while, and on revisits have found, I think, more material uploaded and accessible.
    http://www.memorandum.ru/index.html

    Being Russian language I needed a ‘translator’ and despite misgivings, use the Extensions/ Plug-in’ from https://github.com/FilipePS/Traduzir-paginas-web which facilitates ggl/yandex translations.

    That being said, the site has a variety of subjects and topics, lots of media both photographs and videos…


    About “Memorandum.ru”

    On our website you will find a collection of documents on European military history. The priority for the compilers of this information resource is the period of the so-called Napoleonic wars.

    The second significant part of the collection is devoted to covering issues of military-historical reconstruction or living history and includes: information about material objects of the reconstructed historical period, methods of their manufacture and places of acquisition; works of the epistolary genre about reconstruction; albums of photographs from military-historical events; links to interesting Internet information resources about living history.

    Memorandum.ru is a branch of the Internet project “1812” – the largest information resource on Napoleonics in Russian.


    Yes significant enough to warrant your attention.

    http://www.prokopovich.memorandum.ru/about.html

    The owner and his remarkable reproduction uniforms! I’ve found very little to criticise [Not that I should]!

    http://www.memorandum.ru/map.html

    Site map details.

    http://www.memorandum.ru/clubs.html

    ‘Clubs’ has the three main elements to history you will find useful- the last is the personal site of  “one of the leading specialists in sewing military-historical uniforms Sergei Vladimirovich Prokopovich !”

    From here he has direct links to a myriad of Russian, and some foreign, reproduction uniforms and equipment, including multiple eras, made for both private and state museums clientele!

    Enjoy the site!
    NB- there is much humour and flippency in the video works of reenactors enjoying themselves- including nearly getting blown up.

    Grenadier of Semenovsky Life Guards Regiment 1812.

    http://www.prokopovich.memorandum.ru/images/planchet068_1.jpg

    ~d

    in reply to: Spoiling your fun with Russians (v2) #200271
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Only in Kiev comes up Dragoons by 1812 and is dropped from the Cuirassiers well before then. Kiev as Cuirassiers should have yellow facings, well maybe never sure about anything

    Confused of ? Skip!!

    Yeah I think we’ve both barked up the wrong tree- my quick flick research was too light it seems.

    According the the almost ultimate source- Mark Conrads superb translations:-

    30 August 1814— The Kiev Dragoon Regiment is ordered to have, on the helmet plate above the eagle, a brass shield with the inscription: “Za otlichie” [“For Excellence”], following the pattern for similar badges in the Army infantry (Illus. 1454) (112).

    So, I find now that there was never a Kiev Cuirassier regiment after 1800? anyway.  Although listed under Catherine/ Paul there was, with yellow facings, later for any Kiev regiment, they were ‘Raspberry or Light Crimson’ as Gingerich cites them) facings– based on the Inspection/ Division classifications (see also Gingerich details- offline however).

    So I’d go with a badly mistaken ‘Cuirassiers’ label and revert to Dragoons- as all the rest of the illustrations and data stack up neatly, I think (I got it right this time?).

    Cheers for the input anyway- it made me do better research on a Sunday!
    ~dave

    in reply to: I’m not sure- ‘Battle for Paris’ #200268
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    -what is about this period that attracts such chaps?

    Yes indeed. A very complex question actually- could probably add several more notable ‘voices’ to the list with aberrant characteristics of delusional fervour/ hatred and unwillingness to accept any criticism or even just discuss in a rational manner the possibilities.

    Further, and I was once ‘ignorant’ of many basic facts myself, that we believe what we are taught or shown, not lessened by an incomplete knowledge of the language but also resources, yet we see now how facts and information become manipulations and composites in some alternate reality, for some of those people.

    -d

    in reply to: Austria- Naps + #200244
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Randomly seeking his statement as verification, but only found this one so far…
    =https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/generaldebrigadefr/austrians-

    Jul 11, 2009#2
    It was undyed wool – hence the name of pearl grey. It was simply what came off a sheep’s back and was then washed,. while on campaign, it was maintained with pipeclay, chalk, paint etc. It was not a dyed or bleached white.

    -d

    in reply to: Spoiling your fun with Russians (v2) #200243
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Anyone spotted this?
    Summerfields edit version of ‘L’Armee Russe sous Alexandre… 1805-15,

    Page 58 purports to be about Cuirassiers– however it is both in the middle of the Dragoons text section , and all illustrations are in green, so  I presume that no-one will object to declaring it mislabelled?

    Also, despite the key year of 1808, the reference to the Kiev Cuirassier, being the addition of award  ‘For Distinction’  “Za otlichie” -For Excellence” plate on the helmet, according to the text was in 1814. Edit- see below>>
    regards -d

    in reply to: Perry 28’s- Wurst Pieces #200149
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Hey thanks Mark, I knew you had a variety of tech support on your site but I forget where most things are found.
    I did since locate the bit in Hollins Austrian Arty NV79? but I thought it was the other end, so holding off I’m throwing efforts onto the gunners instead.

    I thought that was the trail- but it’s actually a brace of sorts? I hadn’t picked out the trunions there! Ooops…
    Many thanks again- Ive stolen some of your pics just to study closely,
    cheers d

    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Hot off the Press!!

    Yes, 1st July  the redoubtable and reliable Frédéric Berjaud has again just added new material :
    http://frederic.berjaud.free.fr/articles_en_ligne.htm

    • Updated are many of the regiments- although this time some limited data but several have extensive additions (no I have examined before posting this) from 1800 to a few of 1812). Massive!
    • Also several ‘new’ Regimental entries- de ligne 24eme, 103eme.
    • Note two of the three ‘cavalry’ also received updates.

    Good hunting everyone,
    -d

    in reply to: [TWW] Explain me this…* #200112
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Not sure further explanation is warranted, but I add:-

    It is the ‘linked’ item/ post that maybe could appear in ‘New Replies’, not the thread name I am suggesting be bigger…
    I guess if this isn’t automated, it would be a lot of work to monitor as it would always be ‘out of date’ by the time the next post/reply is added.

    I agree MartinR that your approach is as good as any solution, I concede…

    in reply to: General Truths of Napoleonic French Uniform #200099
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    From a book 111 years old* we read, that indeed, sometimes those in charge certainly did make an effort to dress up!

    Ney was in a desperate mood at this time- he’d been overruled by leader of the cavalry- Murat.

    ” Neither Lannes nor Ney liked being thus placed under Murat’s command…
    The very first order that Murat issued to Ney led to a dispute between them. On 10 October—the day after the victory of Guntzburg —Murat ordered Ney to bring over the whole of the 6th Corps to the south bank of the Danube, leaving only Bourcier’s division of dismounted dragoons** to watch the north front of Ulm.
    Ney rode over to Murat’s head-quarters and, supported by Lannes, pointed out to him that part of the 6th Corps ought to be left on the north bank, for, if Mack broke out on that side, Bourcier was not strong enough to stop him,..
    Murat yielded so far as to tell Ney he might leave Dupont’s division on the north bank. Ney said this would not be enough, and, spreading out a map on the table, tried to make Murat realize the opportunity that was being given to Mack. Murat refused to continue the discussion, and turned
    away from the map.
    He said angrily. “It is my way to make mine in the presence of the enemy…”

     

    Murat was wrong and Ney was right, as events soon showed… When he heard of Dupont’s defeat Napoleon realized that it left Mack free to march out of Ulm. He hastened to repair the mischief that Murat’s blunder had caused,.. Ney heard in silence the unjust reproaches addressed to him by the Emperor for having left Dupont unsupported on the north bank. But the lecture ended with what was good news to him.

    The Emperor had watched these preliminary operations from the south side. Murat rode beside him. Ney came to take Napoleon’s last orders before putting himself at the head of the attack.
    Turning to Murat he said to him with a meaning that only Lannes could have explained, but Murat himself understood and did not care to discuss.

    “Come Prince, come with me, and make your plans in the presence of the enemy!

     

    Riesch, left unsupported by Mack, made a hard fight before he was driven from the heights of Elchingen by Ney’s impetuous attack. There were moments when it seemed that the day would end in a defeat for the French.

    Ney at Elchingen:-

    ” More than once Ney led in person the troops he threw into the fight, and he was one of the first to enter the village of Elchingen. He wore the full parade uniform of a marshal with the star of the Legion glittering on his breast, but in the thickest of the fight he was untouched. “

    Rather glad about that as 40 odd years ago I painstakingly painted a figure to the best of my ability, and was sad to learn that he never made it to Austerlitz. Of course he was securing the flank of La Grande Armée in the Tyrol… He now of course needs a new command base!

    This despite our candor for ‘simple’ uniforms- well we can still get it right.

    * THE BRAVEST OF THE BRAVE- A. HILLIARD ATTERIDGE  1913 METHUEN & CO. LTD.
    ** Not a unit you read about very often!

    cheers, d

    in reply to: French infantry in 1914. #200095
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    but it does stand in contrast to the general perception that the French just got rolled up effortlessly until the Marne.

    You are learning, as I did many years ago, that “general perception” given by English writers, [in books and articles debating outside matters] of all skills and sources, includes a huge bias and critical ‘not the way we would do it’ underlying animosity.

    The Brits have a long way to go to get over their ’empire’ brain and dismissive behaviours toward all foreigners. That is clearly shown in open society today where non-white/ Anglo-Saxon (who themselves were partly immigrants) are still belittled even though 100% born and raised in British ‘culture’. Let alone those escaping fascism of various kinds…

    If needing photographic support, hunt out the ’80s series of  ‘Uniforms’ magazines that have a lot of historical data on that epic event.
    regards d

    in reply to: General Truths of Napoleonic French Uniform #200045
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Following on from the “on modern artists*” earlier- I will add that some have also taken to giving ADCs arm brassards to many of the Emperors personal ADCs, as well as Etat-Major personnel so designated and some Garde Imperialé officers.

    Frankly, they didn’t do it in earlier illustrations, I wonder why in the last decade they’ve decided to add them? Peer pressure?

    Frankly, despite the same designation being used, I do not see mentioned anywhere in documents nor in paintings or illustrations of such being the case. So I believe we have a situation of rewriting/ painting history before out very eyes. I think I do not see any Rousselot plate with them!

    I am referring to the very top of artists, not the sites that copy and reproduce colouration and form ad-nauseum to create saleable product. I gave up on their ‘historical accuracy’ years ago.

    *I’ll add here that the single feather ‘flight’ seen on Rapp is in period iconographie (yes I catch on) related solely to an ‘older man’, that is Major-General Marshal Berthier, always in a full dress (not ceremonial) rig.

    -d

    in reply to: Perry 28’s- Wurst Pieces #200027
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    No, ok, well I’ve sent them an email.
    Several books gave me no leads either…

    in reply to: [TWW] Explain me this…* #199993
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Since you can go to the most recent post by clicking on the last updated time in the header

    Which of 40 Forums do you suggest using?? Thats not a solution to the question, ahem…

     

    First world problems…

    yeah yeah we know, and IT makes life easier… NOT!

    Mike, thanks,

     

    in reply to: What's on your painting desk/table/corner #199952
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    [Duplicate]

    In an hysterical moment of I must paint something… last nite I roughed out the uniform for a unit I promised myself I’d never do… a Russian 1805 LeibGarde unit.

    [IMG_7377fam_ Russian LeibGarde Jaeger_sample by DaveW, on Flickr

    He was previously painted for the 5th Jaegers- from WF I trimmed his shako peaks down, added facing colours and lace etc.

    Needs more work of course… pompom, rifle strap (others were red, LG had black); ditto sack was earlier linen cloth, LG however, like all its new uniforms, was black.

    And clearly just using glasses aint a solution… photos are soo demoralising… still 20 minutes work…I think a unit of them will look mighty fine!
    -d

    in reply to: Spoiling your fun with Russians (v2) #199951
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    In an hysterical moment of I must paint something… last nite I roughed out the uniform for a unit I promised myself i’d never do… a Russian 1805 LeibGarde unit.

    [IMG_7377fam_ Russian LeibGarde Jaeger_sample by DaveW, on Flickr

    He was previously painted for the 5th Jaegers- from WF I trimmed his shako peaks down, added facing colours and lace etc.

    Needs more work of course… pompom, rifle strap (others were red, LG had black); ditto sack was earlier linen cloth, LG however, like all its new uniforms, was black.

    And clearly just using glasses aint a solution… photos are soo demoralising… still 20 minutes work…I think a unit of them will look mighty fine!
    -d

    in reply to: Is Command&Control in games a myth? #199949
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    going down the chain of command to the lowest level of operabilty. But how much fun would it be making 200 dice rolls to find out what the left flank does?

    I observed some kind of fantasy game that had one player throwing 60 odd dice… wtf?? There wasn’t that many figures in use__ I just walked away ashen, shaking my head….

     

    in reply to: Is Command&Control in games a myth? #199896
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Interesting discussion that is also happening over at TMP and the SoA forum.

    And what, you think it’s a coincidence…?? Phht!

    Most gamers are like Chihuahuas, all bark and bluster, no imagination beyond rule sets. [And having lived in a house that had those oversized rats, I abhor their very existence...]

    • It is entirely possible, even a great learning experience, to make players WRITE orders that they cannot willfully change at random.
    • The adherence to ‘simple’ D6 is the problem. Not enough variation for many given circumstances. Adopted it after playing EmpireIII and incorporated into a set of house rules based on the exploits by Paddy Griffith. D20 either singular or as % give better variants.
    • As designer/ ref/ umpire most of my games for experienced players have included real ‘fog of war’ situations giving a scenario, but not telling them all about the enemy. Previous players 30 yrs ago were better at handling this than the current crop.
      My regular opponents know to expect, and think about something ‘outside the box’ in my driven scenarios. And yes quite a lot of the time as self-player I don’t win! So you cant call be GOD!

    _done___ d

     

    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    I’ve added an Addendum to the post above.

    in reply to: Rivers- Tell us About them. #199839
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Just as an update, I’d used my exotic long river sections of felt and had no shame bringing them out again- both full size ‘river’ @ 100mm wide x 1M long (sans any banks at all) and stream just 25mm wide. So latest game saw the full metres in use, plus a few shorter bends in the middle section…

    Often I’d use the natural lichen to line the edge as both decoy and bank markers, but it was all used for the woods edges this game.
    No harm, despite some players not liking an uncrossable obstacle, no one criticised their design or impact otherwise!
    cheers d

    in reply to: Spoiling your fun with Russians (v2) #199790
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Another snippet I spotted today from Conrads

    VISKOVATOV
    Compiled by Highest direction
    Saint Petersburg, Military Typography Office, 1851

    [TRANSLATED BY MARK CONRAD, 1993]
    VOLUME 10b
    Grenadiers, Musketeers, Jägers, Marines, and Carabiniers 1801-1825′

    All the way down to –
    8 April 1809— There was issued the following order regarding the shoulder slings on muskets:

    1.) The lower bracket on the stock, for the sling,…
    2.) The button on the sling…
    3.) A buckle with prong …
    4.) The upper side, i.e. the side colored red, of the sling is to be lacquered so that it does not stain the pouch crossbelt (702).

    I’d always thought that belts would be stained completely and dyed all over, but this clarification tells us they were NOT!

    So on models, the inner sling would be natural leather colour, the outer (now downward side) would be the red/ madder colour.

    Just a nitpick I guess, but larger figure modellers may need to take more care!
    cheers d

    in reply to: Spoiling your fun with Russians (v2) #199785
    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    On ‘Why’ at Austerlitz?

    Not new perhaps, as I’ve read such in English volumes before. Not sure of their dates, but in reading Mikaberidzes ‘Kutuzov’ thesis* I find he quotes the same verbatim, without further explanation or controversy.

    “The Allied headquarters, meanwhile, was divided over the strategy. General Kutusov and several of his senior officers, including Bagration, Miloradovich and Alexander Langeron, emphasized the importance of not engaging Napoleon and withdrawing towards Galicia. They argued that it was in Napoleon’s interests to engage the Allies as soon as possible. Instead of giving a battle, they proposed a delay until the reinforcements arrived from Italy and Prussia. Kutuzuv stated, “ only when we will be able to join [Levin] Bennigsen and the Prussians. [Meantime], the further we entice Napoleon, the weaker he will become and the greater will be the distance that separates him from his reserves. [Once this is achieved], I will bury the French bones in the heart of Galicia.”6

    Now the latter quote sounds a bit grandiose and probably, if stated, was an afterthought or post-mortem treatise on his humour.

    He follows with-

    However, Alexander and Francis disregarded these arguments. According to Russian military regulations, the tsar assumed the command of the army while he stayed with the troops. Although Alexander officially kept Kutuzov in charge of the army, his presence limited this general’s actions. General Langeron recalled that Alexander’s entourage ignored and ridiculed commander-in-chief; when Kutuzov inquired about the plans, he was bluntly told, “That’s none of your business.”7 The situation was further complicated by Kutuzov’s “timorous character and courtier-like habits”8 as he tended to comply with the emperor’s wishes, even if they were wrong.
    Finally, Alexander was surrounded by a group of young and arrogant noblemen, led by Prince Peter Dolgoruky, who urged him to lead the army against Napoleon notwithstanding the circumstances. These princes persuaded the emperor that he had the qualities for military command and his presence in the army would change the battle outcome.”

    Well you don’t mess with the head of the syndicate do you? As Kutuzov will have witnessed under Paul I as well.

    It was Alexander himself who provided the ultimate chiding remark about Kutuzov, but upon himself as well-

    “Alexander later observed, “I was young and inexperienced; Kutuzov told me that we had to act differently, but he should have been more persistent in his arguments.” Shilder, Alexander, II, 134.

    So there we have it, all the compulsion required at the time and place (Olmütz) to ‘go get ‘em’ without any further debate.

    regards- d

    *The Lion of the Russian Army: Life and Military Career of General Prince Peter Bagration 1765-1812.
    2003 FSU.

    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    …What better day than the anniversary of W…

    Any day is better than that one,

    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    No.

    Avatar photoOotKust
    Participant

    Thanks guys- enjoy your past-times !!

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 846 total)