[OotKust]

Buck Surdu wrote:

Thanks. I meant the gun carriages. Stained wood is intersting. That seems uncommon.

Well, if you can’t believe him, then who?

As promised, excerpts from- NAPOLEONIC ARTILLERY
ANTHONY .L DAWSON, PAUL L. DAWSON AND STEPHEN SUMMERFIELD (2007 by The Crowood Press Ltd)

Westphalia inherited equipment from Brunswick, Hanover and Hesse-Kassel, the latter being 16× -3 pdr regimental guns and 2x 1-pdr amusettes.

The Kingdom of Westphalia was created on 15 November 1807. In December that year the four foot artillery batteries raised were armed with Russian guns that matched French calibres. [As bore size didn’t match- does this imply bored out to French 6 or 8 pounders?]

A year later [1808] Napoleon sent some French guns to Westphalia, along with powder and munitions.

By 1809 six companies of foot artillery had been raised and one of horse artillery; each of these was armed with 4x 6-pdr guns and 2x 7-pdr howitzers (a total of 28x 6- pdrs and 16x 7-pdr howitzers).

By the end of 1811, Westphalia had 1st and 8th Infantry Regiments at Danzig with two guns each; and two horse artillery companies and four foot artillery companies, manning between them 36x guns and 14x howitzers, based in Kassel.

Napoleon wrote to Jerome his youngest brother, King of Westphalia, urging him to establish a 12-pdr battery; this was mentioned in the order of battle for VI Corps 1812.
The equipment used during the Russian campaign was apparently of French design. *The gun tubes were either French-or Prussian-inspired [?] designs mounted on Gribeauval-style carriages:
26x 6-pdr field guns and 41x caissons (1,020 canister rounds, 4,325 roundshot)
8x 24-pdr howitzers with 25x caissons (48 canister rounds, 1,472 shell)
4x 12-pdr field guns with 12x caissons, and 23x infantry [ammunition] caissons.”

*I’ll add my clarifications here:-

• 24pdr Howitzer was the ANXI model of ‘lighter’ field howitzer that became standard and was well liked in use.
• Given that, the 6pdrs must also have been ANXI model barrels. Quite what ‘Prussian inspired’ alludes to I cannot say.
• However, lastly, the confusing and obfuscated matter of ANXI must also be clarified, as the original ‘lightened’ gun carriage [1805/06] proved too weak and many broke in use in 1809. Thus, those ‘Gribeauval-style carriages’ not destroyed were strengthened with added steel bracing (strapping more like), and used to mount the ANXI range of ordnance. Thus, the similarity between Gribeauval and ANXI became even more tangible (and irrelevant in gaming).

I believe, though unwritten, that these must have been 4pdr carriages, as the 8’s had double trunnion positions and were much heavier, which would negate much of the designed technical weight loss.

The book Table 5.13 cites Russian Heavy, and Light 12pdrs, and 6 pdrs?!
If these were in fact fielded, it can only be on the basis of ammunition supply being available. As for the massive amount of Austrian ordnance taken captive. Alternatively, they could have been relegated to fortress roles?

As to colours, despite the quotation above [which BTW is from 2011 so well after the book came out], the book cites Table 9.2:-
<p style=”text-align: center;”>Westphalia         1806-1813      Olive green but some sources show yellow stripes on wheels
Metal Work-  Black</p>
So, there we have it.
I recently noted there is an Errata on the book at:-
https://www.napoleon-series.org/reviews/military/c_NapArtyCorrections.html

Good luck!
regards davew

 

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

hi,

You mean the gun carriage?
Limber train? Caissons and workshop train?

Westphalia was an artificial construct- so it began with local German troops and equipment.
Apart from fortress ordnance, of antique design no doubt, little foreign ordnance would be found.

And the French who occupied it remained so.
Of course what they captured and liberated over the various campaigns was liberally distributed to ‘allies’.

I’ll have to look up Nap Arty by Summerfield, Dawsons etc. and get back to you if not beaten to it.

However a quick search found this snippet from the same Dr. Summerfield-

“The Westphalian Artillery was not French Artillery Green but as shown in Smoothbore Ordnance Journal as being stained wood with black metalwork. The George Nafziger book is a good start on the army. It is a greatly underestimated army that did not show its best in 1809 but had matured by 1812-13.”

Never knew that!
BTW, you can correct the title with an edit.
regards dave

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

Skip wrote:

I strive for perfection, but good enough is good enough. Bet units painted by only information out of pi ctures in books at best, text at worse 40 years ago are bad. But would hope if someone was ever to play my opponent they could recognize what unit it was if they know the army.

I dont disagree Skip- we all have the niche we want to aspire too- so many ppl have bought whole painted armies, or had them painted by someone else, which is almost the same thing. But I don’t care for it- spending time and being creative, just a little, is a reward. To see them on the table ditto.

And for some of us, the kick of knowing more than we need to paint figures is our involvement in the hobby, and to a certain extent life. I thoroughly enjoyed my 9 months away in France and Europe back in ’84, nearly full time doing my ‘private’ research and collecting what I wanted (but I didn’t buy a Garde Chasseur officers sabre for 6000F when offered by an auctioneer…). It was a lot of money so early in my trip, but I should have done so!

Yes people still new to the hobby, or long ago dropped it, ask some weird questions. We’ve a few ‘new’ old bods come to the club, and I’ve spoken about weaning them away from point and  list driven competitive gaming toward scenario and ‘historical’ gentlemanly gaming.

I had to watch another guy use my 1814 light cavalry brigade (very weak units)- some lightly customised figures from Minifigs, beat my ‘other’ Allied boys…

😉
dave

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

OotKust wrote:

We shall wait…

Mate has come thru and photographed the Heritage figures for me.
Heres some original Uhlans (the colour brighter than 15s really appear I’m sure):

and some infantry, we think he did again or from new lead…

I think I did the feldzeichen (sp??) in a pale brown, representing drying leaves.

So thats some nice early generation 15’s…

cheers dave

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

Guy Farrish wrote:

I remember System 12

Hinchliffe Handbook 1974- on hand because a) supposed to be scanning for another collector of detritus and b) identifying horses by poses to fit the light/ heavy categories without current photos being available (lucky Ian Hinds is so amiable about helping sell his!).

Page 132 is ‘System12′ -an advertorial that isn’t that convincing really:-

http://IMG_7408 by DaveW[/url], on Flickr

to grab a copy of it! Too large for tww..

And Heritage, bought a bunch of bags [ 50-60 figs??] from RAFM back in 80s… [same time as E,E & L] dont have any digital pics  but asked friend I sold all my 15s too to seek… a couple of packets I have in deep store (ie somewhere…) are Prussian SYW IIRC because I was going to swing them into 1806 Prussians.

We shall wait…

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

All very civilised Willz 🙂

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

vtsaogames wrote:

true 15mm Hinchcliffe figures from the 70s.

What??? I never knew…

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

Im not in this league, but thought I’d give a push as David Morfitt  https://nba-sywtemplates.blogspot.com/and his excellent digital flags only has 5 entries on the Forum- and deserves more recognition for his work!

I haven’t used yet but collected a couple of AWI tidbits for addition to ‘random’ ad-hoc units (which the entire armies on both sides are- no time wasted on research here!).
regards d

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

So, as they say, the world turns…

And in a reversal, well this is about modellers. Perhaps overly picky, IDK…

I’d been inducting some new friends into a milder form of gaming, using a certain set of rules that I’d contributed to and suggested some historical changes that the author agreed with [much more that he didn’t- but thats ok..].

And in perusing the rules for the umpteenth time (distance between games had been extensive) I spotted these little anomalies. Can you see them or care?

Here’s a close up:-

Now, I’m sure this is a ‘library’ photo from long ago. The author of the rules never had any as he was a die-in-the-wool 18thC man.

Being as how the rule book was published by the same company that now OWNS the manufacturing rights on the figures, well that’s why I suggest it is a library photo.

Now anyone who has done even basic research on them, Napoleons bodyguard Grenadiers a Cheval knows that they have scarlet feather plumes right? Err, so why are these half-black? And cockades, were never gold, but natural colours; nor the contra-epaulettes gold except to officers.

Glad to see the head of the trompette bearing a bleu-de-ciel [no, NOT skyblue] plume, however he also appears in a blue habit, which is just wrong! They wore crimson, and this is clearly a ‘dress’ parade.

Other niggles, obvious errors include the officers- La Garde standard-bearers were all Sous-Lieutenant, unlike the line until that changed post 1808-; escorts NCO’s but lets not be picky- just that both these officers should have gold cords not white cotton of the ranks.

Having said all that, these figures are superbly painted with not a detail out of place… Ive made as many mistakes myself and also deliberately ‘mis-handle’ some items to add variation! [Ever received a figure in the mail with half a musket, or unmolded plume or knapsack/ sabre?].

Lacking modelling of significance (desk is littered with late allies tho) this is all I got.
-d

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

Nice work…

Blogger, aka Guuggler, runs others into the ground and then plays innocent and chaste- such perversity is lost on them, those who claim/ed “do no harm”.

At the risk of commenting on a past politico, Tarleton reads like a spoilt brat, who was allowed to exchange his virtues for psychopathic outbursts. Can’t say I was endeared to him at all, in war or peace.

The atrocities he/his men committed should have resulted in hanging. Such were the times…

-d

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

TBH, everything but buildings.
All you see in my game pics…

Still have a kg+ of green sawdust(s) I made in the 70’s.
Product of  Depression Era parents- dont throw anything away!
-d

*Edit*- Recycling materials and upcycling old terrain got done in last 5 years after the ‘Golden Years’ of 80s and 90s production was a bit weary.
Yes I did use Woodland Scenics on natural tree twigs and cut down branches etc. but that still qualifies as home-made as far as I’m concerned. The few ‘off the shelf’ trees- well they look like it!
– – –

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

Arthur Harman wrote:

I don’t think it appropriate to categorise people who work in overseas call or administrative centres as ‘dumb Philipinos’ [sic]. Yes, companies who outsource are taking advantage of the different economic conditions and exchange rates to reduce their wage bill, but you should not blame the local workers for that. Another reason why such companies employ Filipinos is that they are well-educated, polite and speak better English than many inhabitants of the UK. Jobs in such call centres &c. are highly prized and the companies can select from high quality applicants. There’s no need to make cheap racist jibes.

So you choose one word out of a malaise that overseas capitalists and ethnic malefactors taking advantage of ‘educated’, but otherwise unemployable local; abused in all sorts of way. I once worked for a guy who found out he could treble-quadruple his annual incomes by outsourcing there- us seniors were even to provide tele-guided training and inductions to our ‘projects’ (names for customers).

SO be it, such limited criteria… deleted as required…

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

Nice Patrice!
I knew the Napoleonic Assn guys had equal disdain taking their firing muskets INTO France (had to show ownership with ‘Shotgun’ Arms certs I think).

Amazun,ebyy and all the others are just word quoting idiots. Do they also panic over the Sabre car, or Sabre Tooth tigers etc?
They are factories to churn money and avoid criticism, so devolved outsourcing to …. getting $1 an hour and gawd knows how many others (they reduce taxes by claiming overseas costs etc.) while claiming they make a ‘worthwhile’ contribution to society.
It pathetic! I dont have the answer, but I also dont have to like it___

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

Yes. Cartoony and freakish, copy-cat styles from a flat screen tv that do not have any definition of true depth, ie as in 3D…

After all two generations have been raised in front of cartoons ad-nauseum; I know an 18 year old girl who ‘toorks’ with an American accent because she spent 18 hours a day with Disney as her ‘minder/ carer’… sad but very true!

So why not expect more from the ‘art’ of loonyism to inhabit real space, sometime soon.
But like 1-2-3 and some 6mm game stuff, it aint in my interest area at all. Just more cartoons…

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

OotKust wrote:

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).

Hi,

Continuing my sleuthing I found the definitive documents on the changes to formal designations of Russian forces. From _https://www.napoleon-series.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/A-Century-of-the-Russian-Minstry-of-War-Reform-during-the-period-1801-05-Part-2-5.pdf we get (selected texts):-

• 4. Disbandment of half of the Cuirassier Regiments.
  In the table in the preceding article, we notice that by October 1801, the number of cuirassier regiments had decreased from 13 to six, and the number of dragoon regiments had increased by seven, from 15 regiments to 22 regiments.
  Why did this increase in dragoons occur?
  An explanation of this issue is of particular interest to historians of Russian cavalry, and a quite definitive answer is given in one ‘memo’ and a ‘report’ by the Military Commission.
  The fact is that in order to supplement the original programme, the Commission dealt with various ‘memos,’ ‘arguments,’ and so on, related either to the 11 ‘main subjects’ of its activity, or in general regarding any other issue.
  Among such ‘memos,’ we highlight one dated 1 [13] July, 1801, Privy Councillor Troshchinsky forwarded the memo to the Military Commission by Supreme Command,15 “containing comments on arming the troops, maintaining and clothing them according to three fundamental principles, that is, use to the service, benefit to the troops and savings for the State Treasury.”[16]
  Of the ten articles that made up the note, the following articles should be taken into consideration:
•  1- “Although it is undeniable that cuirassier regiments are needed in the army; nevertheless, the calculation of their number and the type of armament should be consistent with the threat originating from neighbouring states; and while Russia in the past century has fought against  Turkey more than against its other neighbours, where infantry and lightly armed cavalry are more common; besides, their most difficult and costly maintenance must be mentioned, it would not be excessive to reduce the original 13 cuirassier regiments to five, while converting the remainder into dragoons, by which means the State Treasury could save 60,950 roubles, 8 kopeks annually.”
• 6. Regarding the ‘multiplication’ of horse artillery. [23] [-? Quite why this section ins headed like this, I do not understand…]
  “To what extent the sensible benefit that horse artillery brings in war has become known to the whole world from the ten-year war with the French, and therefore it seems it would not be excessive to multiply it in our army and form four battalions each of five companies, of which two battalions should be located on the Dniester, one in Volhynia and one in Lithuania.”Indeed, the Military Commission took note of the articles on cuirassiers and dragoons, and on 20 July [1 August], 1801, the report was granted Supreme approval,24 “in order to avert the excessive costs needed to maintain them to no particular advantage, 13 cuirassier regiments are to be reduced to just six, namely: the two Leib regiments, Military Order, Yekaterinoslav, Malorossia and Glukhov, regarding whose priority over the suitability of others in this arm of service, His Imperial Highness Sovereign Tsarevich Konstantin Palovich, as Inspector of the Cavalry, deigned to testify.”
  The remaining seven: Kazan, Riga, Starodub, Kiev, Chernigov, Tver and Kharkov were
  “amalgamated into the dragoons” (converted).25 Thus, in just ten days part of the ‘Memo’ had been realised; the rest of the ‘articles’ served as guidance.
• On 31 July [12 August] 1801, the following Statutes were granted Supreme approval:26
  1. For cuirassier regiments. etc…

So there we have definitive reason for dismantling the previous regiments, and redesignating from Cuirassier to Dragoons. Dated 1 [13] July, 1801,..

cheers d

 

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

Guy Farrish wrote:

I can’t see why a four deep line would be better as you would be forming square in any case if cavalry were on the way and the two deep line covers more ground.

Not to completely ruin Vincents fine work Guy [may be too late for that…] but aren’t you missing the point?
4 deep was exactly the reason [posited] at QB- so why not Mont St. Jean? Justification I felt was he wanted MORE Brits in the battle line, ergo 4 deep became easier to form square .

But squares would also, if on the front slopes, an artillery target par excellence- assuming the French knew they had to shoot direct and not attempt bounce (fail).

And cavalry that wasn’t charging but ‘walking to contact’ isn’t exactly the threat a mid-Summer open field is supposed to invite.

Having been there and stood on both sides of the battlefield- I would not want to face muskets at 750 yards, let alone a battery of supposed 80 guns… Ça peut sembler fou, mais je digresse…

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

Minor edit above…

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

Cheers Mark

After email mishaps sorted I got a reply from Alan Perry hisself with description and pics- no change to your advice either! Here’s a reduced copy of what he sent with a kind explanation.

I hope I cheered him up with a reply pic of many a WF history shot… 😉

Sorting out aged ‘Hinchliffe’ allies for a knock about game Sunday, (which includes rebasing some figures to ‘my standard’ format of light infantry with only 3 figures per base), so won’t return to HA until next week earliest.
-dave

*Edit- added pix 20jul24

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

vtsaogames wrote:

Wellington rode into Quatre Bras about 3 PM, as Perponcher’s division was being roughly handled.

Ok thanks for the correction. Long delayed memory lapse…

The only ‘Waterloo’ Ive read recently at all were PLDs two missives on Ney and Grouchy which while expanding to the ‘actions’, centred on the French staff. The report of an officer of Pictons Division gives recognition of Wellingtons presence. I shall correct my previous error humbly Sire!

“I fail to see how 4-ranks would improve firepower.”

Not firepower per se, but a much morally stronger Brit unit AND capable of sustained firepower. Kneeling was standard for ranks in square- if you can ‘double the line’ tactically, then very little further difference to ordering front ranks who may have already fired (or be told to reserve their fire) to kneel and allow the rear two ranks to fire over them.

Anyway…

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

Hmm interesting.

You’ve not identified an audience, so its a general walk through the ‘era’. Good summary of the precursor machinations.

I wonder if any ‘new’ tactics actually were developed/ deployed in the era of the Empire. I’d lay money on the ‘spirit and swiftness’ of French deployments,  ie their cited ‘elan’, even at the run that created the most headaches for enemy, before battles commenced the serious part.

Forgive me for spotting:

“Note that Wellington, after seeing the trouble caused by French cavalry in the open terrain at Quatre Bras, went to 4 ranks deep at Waterloo.”

I’m not  Now aware that Wellington was at Quatre Bras, least of all when any French cavalry actions were being taken? But it has been 30 years since I studied the Brits- and my copy of “Wellingtons Despatches” is currently with the restorers, getting the split calf cover repaired to 1857 fitness!

He may have been given accounts of what happened, but in the shambles of a wet overnight retreat and gathering on the battlefield next day, would such detail have been discussed at all. Surely focus was primarily on not achieving the same on June 18th?

My understanding of Waterloo/ Mont St.Jean was that he deployed in 4 ranks to commit maximum effective man firepower for what men he had. I.e. he couldnt have deployed units in full line due to the geography of the site, but he could build a ‘wall of bodies bristling with firepower..
I believe it was also only the Brits infantry- none of the ‘allied’ troops were so disposed- due to their less than stellar nature?
cheers davew
*Edits and corrections* 19Jul24

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

Not Connard Sage wrote:

Guy Farrish wrote:

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

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

Not Connard Sage wrote:

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…

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

Skip wrote:

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

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

Part Trois

OotKust wrote:

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 ACTUAL charges and ALLEGED 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 even offered !)

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 ‘A’ spy in Napoleons government, even 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

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

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 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

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

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.

---

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

Guy Farrish wrote:

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 _

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

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

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

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

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

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

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

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

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

Konstantinos Travlos wrote:

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

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

vtsaogames wrote:

OotKust wrote:

….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…

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

vtsaogames wrote:

Konstantinos Travlos wrote:

…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…

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

Skip wrote:

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

 

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

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

---

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

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

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

Skip wrote:

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

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

-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

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[OotKust]

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

Swinging from left to right no matter where the hobby goes!

[Author]

Posts