Grod
A Fixture
Thanks Martin.
I do miss the European shows which were a real treat for me.
All the best.
Gordon
'Last Advance of the Old Guard' Waterloo. 75mm
- Thread starter Grod
- Start date
Help Support planetFigure:
I do miss the European shows which were a real treat for me.
All the best.
Gordon
clubcat
PlanetFigure Supporter
I love this conversation. The figures created are great as are their poses, however I do support the accuracy camp. I feel that if a figure or group of figures are purported to be historical then they should depict, as far as possible, the correct historical details.
Waterloo will always be a contentious battle as there are to many egos and nationalist elements to it and that's before you compound it for two hundred years. Even Siborne who took pains to accurately as possible depict the battle, even asking on vegetation/crops etc, couldn't pull it off completely and he had a great amount of first hand accounts to work with albeit quite a while after the battle. I was amused that his initial model contained too many Prussians for the Dukes liking, so he removed quite a large amount of them until he was happy.
Waterloo will always be a contentious battle as there are to many egos and nationalist elements to it and that's before you compound it for two hundred years. Even Siborne who took pains to accurately as possible depict the battle, even asking on vegetation/crops etc, couldn't pull it off completely and he had a great amount of first hand accounts to work with albeit quite a while after the battle. I was amused that his initial model contained too many Prussians for the Dukes liking, so he removed quite a large amount of them until he was happy.
Just a flavour of what might have been: https://marinamaral.com/napoleons-grande-armee-veterans-2/
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2009
- Messages
- 6,037
Bottom line is it’s a great set of figures that’ll look very nice painted up. The main issue is basically just what to label it up as. I only dabble occasionally in Napoleonics so unlikely that I’d buy it. But if I did, that wouldn’t be a deal-breaker for me.
- Steve
- Steve
Blind Pew
PlanetFigure Supporter
100% historical accuracy 100% of the time is probably impossible.
The bottom line is that this looks a superbly produced kit.
The bottom line is that this looks a superbly produced kit.
NigelR
PlanetFigure Supporter
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2018
- Messages
- 2,159
I have hesitated to comment on this as I too am a great fan of historical accuracy. The attack of the Old Guard has been the subject of a lot of recent research and despite some uncertainty there is definitely a clearer picture as to what happened. Like David said, the 1st Grenadiers carried the Eagle and were not involved in the attack. The only grenadier units involved were from the 3rd and 4th Grenadiers, with the 2nd battalion of the 2nd Grenadiers supporting the second attack which was repulsed by Chasse.
The 3rd and 4th Grenadiers were hastily assembled Guard units and did not have full dress uniforms. According to Lachoque, who would have had access to original French sources, the 3rd Grenadiers did not have enough bearskins to go around so many wore shakos and forage caps, and carried line packs and muskets. Many of the uniforms of the 4th Grenadiers resembled those of national Guards. So any representation of the 3rd and 4th Grenadiers should really have a mix of uniforms. And Lachoque does state that the 1st Grenadiers wore greatcoats.....
These are lovely figures but it's such a pity there wasn't a bit more research done. I would just urge figure manufacturers to put a post out on forums like these saying "We are thinking of doing xyz subject, anyone got any sources or information?" before they make the figures. Then all the obsessives like me can comment before the figures are produced rather than after....
We are more than happy to give our comments for free
The 3rd and 4th Grenadiers were hastily assembled Guard units and did not have full dress uniforms. According to Lachoque, who would have had access to original French sources, the 3rd Grenadiers did not have enough bearskins to go around so many wore shakos and forage caps, and carried line packs and muskets. Many of the uniforms of the 4th Grenadiers resembled those of national Guards. So any representation of the 3rd and 4th Grenadiers should really have a mix of uniforms. And Lachoque does state that the 1st Grenadiers wore greatcoats.....
These are lovely figures but it's such a pity there wasn't a bit more research done. I would just urge figure manufacturers to put a post out on forums like these saying "We are thinking of doing xyz subject, anyone got any sources or information?" before they make the figures. Then all the obsessives like me can comment before the figures are produced rather than after....
We are more than happy to give our comments for free
The Riveteer
Well-Known Member
Nothing to do with the model but just some historical perspective; the myth of Maitland's Guards shattering the unshakable Old Guard was really nothing of the sort.
As NigelR stated for the Grenadiers, the fourth and third Chasseurs were hastily cobbled together and were all relatively untested. Paul L Dawson states "Neither the 3rd or 4th Chasseurs had been under fire as military formations before the attack at Waterloo, which may explain why, when fired upon by the Allies, the regiments never made contact with the allied lines before breaking and fleeing".
Adkin's Waterloo Companion tells us the 4th chasseurs battalions were merged into one unit after heavy losses at Ligny. All three units that faced Maitland had been under cannister fire while approaching the Allied crest and were also faced by the 2nd battalion of the 95th rifles (not often mentioned).
Adkin gives the battalion strengths as 1090 (combined 4th Chasseurs), 531 (1/3rd Chasseurs) and 531 (2nd Chasseurs) - obviously approximate figures, but roughly the same as stated by Scott Bowden in his seminal work "Armies at Waterloo0".
So we have approx. 2150 men, some of who had faced heavy losses two days before; in three relatively tight packed formations and having been raked by Artillery fire; suddenly fired on by approx. 2475 elite Guards and 650 highly trained riflemen with state of the art rifles (Adkin and Bowden's figures). All that in an army already suspicious of it's leaders from the start, and probably knowing that the Prussian army was already storming their right/rear flank at the same time. Changes the narrative a bit don't you think?
The 3rd Chasseurs, in advance to the right of the 4th, broke first, and even then the 4th continued on until the 52nd maneuvered to flank them on their left.
Paul L Dawson recounts the 3rd regiment was then run down by Allied cavalry as they fled; "the entire Regiment being virtually captured". Although the fate of the 4th Chasseurs is less well documented, Dawson says they are said to have lost something like 79 per cent in casualties, prisoners and deserters.
The Guard retreats! I'm not b....y surprised!
David
As NigelR stated for the Grenadiers, the fourth and third Chasseurs were hastily cobbled together and were all relatively untested. Paul L Dawson states "Neither the 3rd or 4th Chasseurs had been under fire as military formations before the attack at Waterloo, which may explain why, when fired upon by the Allies, the regiments never made contact with the allied lines before breaking and fleeing".
Adkin's Waterloo Companion tells us the 4th chasseurs battalions were merged into one unit after heavy losses at Ligny. All three units that faced Maitland had been under cannister fire while approaching the Allied crest and were also faced by the 2nd battalion of the 95th rifles (not often mentioned).
Adkin gives the battalion strengths as 1090 (combined 4th Chasseurs), 531 (1/3rd Chasseurs) and 531 (2nd Chasseurs) - obviously approximate figures, but roughly the same as stated by Scott Bowden in his seminal work "Armies at Waterloo0".
So we have approx. 2150 men, some of who had faced heavy losses two days before; in three relatively tight packed formations and having been raked by Artillery fire; suddenly fired on by approx. 2475 elite Guards and 650 highly trained riflemen with state of the art rifles (Adkin and Bowden's figures). All that in an army already suspicious of it's leaders from the start, and probably knowing that the Prussian army was already storming their right/rear flank at the same time. Changes the narrative a bit don't you think?
The 3rd Chasseurs, in advance to the right of the 4th, broke first, and even then the 4th continued on until the 52nd maneuvered to flank them on their left.
Paul L Dawson recounts the 3rd regiment was then run down by Allied cavalry as they fled; "the entire Regiment being virtually captured". Although the fate of the 4th Chasseurs is less well documented, Dawson says they are said to have lost something like 79 per cent in casualties, prisoners and deserters.
The Guard retreats! I'm not b....y surprised!
David
Martin64
A Fixture
Good background information but it should be stressed that Gordon Mitchell is a Napoleonic buff and does not depend on these facts provided by PF. Our Hobby mostly sells dreams and myths and these sell far better than the somewhat drab and less colorful events on the battlefield described in memories of eye-witness-accounts etc. For the same reason the contemporary paintings were striving for the myths. Nevertheless everybody can scratch his view how it really was and maybe even try his luck by offering his results to others Hobbyists.
The Riveteer
Well-Known Member
Martin, I largely agree with you. My personal intent here was only to question the "historical claim" suggested by the piece's title. I have no problem with people wanting recreations of famous works of military art even if those works contain errors - I get it.
In those cases just make it clear that is what it is. It is where a specific incident is alluded to and the model contradicts current knowledge of the subject that bothers me.
I do believe that history is a fluid concept. I already have a wide data base on Waterloo specifically yet I have still bought three new books on the subject this year alone, and every book surprises me and tells me something new. That knowledge does not often seep into the realms of general knowledge, and the myths perpetuate.
I want those myths to be clarified as such and failure to do that leads to the likes of Black Cleopatra on Netflix.
In Grod's new piece it is the title that got me going. It does not depict "The Last advance of the Old Guard" for the reasons given in posts above; that title suggests Waterloo to most people and the incident being alluded too was actually an advance by the "Middle Guard". This is not Grod's fault, it is the fault of 175 years of propaganda taught in schools and shown in documentaries based on limited research which has seen a recent boom over the last 50-60 years.
If model producers stick to generic titles (and I'm not referring to Grod specifically here) there is no conflict. "The advance of The Old Guard" for example would have raised no hackles and could be a depiction of any previous Guard action.
O.K. I am being a bit pedantic here. admitted, but I'm just trying to be informative to those who have a liking for this subject who may not be quite obsessive about it as I am.
On the other hand - I know absolutely nothing about German WWII uniforms or Roman armour.
David
In those cases just make it clear that is what it is. It is where a specific incident is alluded to and the model contradicts current knowledge of the subject that bothers me.
I do believe that history is a fluid concept. I already have a wide data base on Waterloo specifically yet I have still bought three new books on the subject this year alone, and every book surprises me and tells me something new. That knowledge does not often seep into the realms of general knowledge, and the myths perpetuate.
I want those myths to be clarified as such and failure to do that leads to the likes of Black Cleopatra on Netflix.
In Grod's new piece it is the title that got me going. It does not depict "The Last advance of the Old Guard" for the reasons given in posts above; that title suggests Waterloo to most people and the incident being alluded too was actually an advance by the "Middle Guard". This is not Grod's fault, it is the fault of 175 years of propaganda taught in schools and shown in documentaries based on limited research which has seen a recent boom over the last 50-60 years.
If model producers stick to generic titles (and I'm not referring to Grod specifically here) there is no conflict. "The advance of The Old Guard" for example would have raised no hackles and could be a depiction of any previous Guard action.
O.K. I am being a bit pedantic here. admitted, but I'm just trying to be informative to those who have a liking for this subject who may not be quite obsessive about it as I am.
On the other hand - I know absolutely nothing about German WWII uniforms or Roman armour
.David
Romariogendalf
A Fixture
- Hш Gordon. Thank you for your models. I watch very closely what you release. As a collector and as the founder and owner of "Legion Meniatures", I want to support and tell you. Send all critics to hell.
- I look up to you and want to be better than you.) Just release figurines. I would love to have these sets in my collection.
Grod
A Fixture
Thanks for your kind comments and support. It is much appreciated.
Cheers
Gordon
The Riveteer
Well-Known Member
Really useful and constructive contribution there. Until now I thought we were all having an enjoyable discussion.
David
Martin64
A Fixture
Οι παππούδες μου πολέμησαν για να μην υπάρξει ναζισμός. Υποστηρίζω την Ορθοδοξία και τον ρωσικό κόσμο
Maybe the guys who liked the post of Legion Miniatures that wishes all critics to hell should have had a closer look at the political message in Greek at the bottom of his post beside the welcome arrogant bashing of people who dare to comment other than "great, must buy etc." when a new release is advertised on this forum.
Dear owner of Legion Miniatures: High horses take long falls - I like your products but if you don`t care about critics your products will always be inferior to releases of other companies like RPmodels who reacts in a positive and professional way to supportive critics on this forum. If you really look up to Gordon you should maybe learn from him how to handle critical posts. -
Cheers, Martin
Hi everyone
The subject of the action at Waterloo would have been better as a interesting subject in the Lounge and not develop into this on a release thread
Let's ALL just respect Gordon's release and the amount of work it takes to bring to the market ....buy it if you wish and enjoy the painting
Nap
The subject of the action at Waterloo would have been better as a interesting subject in the Lounge and not develop into this on a release thread
Let's ALL just respect Gordon's release and the amount of work it takes to bring to the market ....buy it if you wish and enjoy the painting
Nap
Martin64
A Fixture
My final post on this thread - briefly: A very nice release and the only thing that was brought up is that it perpetuates a myth against well known historical facts for the sake of commercial success that Gordon btw. totally deserves.
As a visual evidence that the posters from hell support Gordon - maybe even more than some keyboard warriors from Greek Orthodox and Russian heaven - I show a picture of models from Gordons recent releases that were built by me.
What do you think Kevin - do four Hussars buy the right to comment on another release and point at contradicting historical facts or should all members just buy and paint or don`t buy and shut up?
I bring up a suggestion of the past that a producer should have the option to flag his thread(s) on this forum with a tag "new release - not for discussion".
About my models below: Great stuff highly recommended and Gordons customer service is a class of it´s own.
Cheers, Martin
Hi Martín
No one has to buy to "earn" the right to comment , I would be interested in producers thoughts on your "flag"
Hope we see the hussars painted up soon
Happy benchtime
Nap
No one has to buy to "earn" the right to comment , I would be interested in producers thoughts on your "flag"
Hope we see the hussars painted up soon
Happy benchtime
Nap
The Riveteer
Well-Known Member
I agree, but I don't see further need in this instance, - I think everything necessary has now been said.
I started this off with a comment on historical veracity. When this happens you never know whether you will be ignored, receive a couple of comments, or if it will go on forever. At the initial posting Gordon's thread seemed the relevant place to comment to me and it's only after a protracted number of replies that it become a topic in it's own right. At what point along the way did this happen? I don't know.
I could have just started a thread in the lounge, and with hindsight, I would have done that; but without naming Gordon's release would anyone have known where I was coming from? If I had done that and referenced Gordon's release there wouldn't that have appeared worse, by picking him out for attention in a general forum? Again - I don't know.
I don't think anyone here has voiced a direct criticism of the model in it's own right, so just let's let it rest. I will.
I have enjoyed the discussion here despite some members regretfully having taken things a little personally. I may open a new thread in the lounge at a later date on a similar topic without highlighting any specific models.
David
