One of the difficulties of entering into wargaming for this specific period and particularly the Dutch Wars period is the lack of readily available publications. I feel it really is a period on the cusp at this time of being 'unlocked' by researchers in order that the specific details of uniforms and equipment become available to the wider sub-culture - the wargamer. Certainly this is a problem area in the meantime looking for details about the Dutch and it seems probable that most if not all of our answers remain locked in the mass of emerging archival material.
Having spent some time on the Netherlands Army website this date I took the time to read an article by F.G Wilde on De mannen van 1688: een poging tot reconstructie (available in pdf) which I was able to read paragraph by paragraph thanks to the wonders of Internet translation software - what an amazing age we live in.
Wilde certainly has the Dutch pike by the outbreak of war in 1672 as 'largely' armoured - helmet and half-armour to be precise. Whilst no specific analysis is applied to the discontinuation of armour, it might be surmised that discarding of half-armour would have accelerated as a result of William's reforms in the face of French superiority over the following years.
By 1674 we see the musketeers (line regiments presumably) carrying the bandolier or twelve apostles and thus we can presume the matchlock. It seems that there was no reason why flintlock armed men might not continue the use of the bandolier with its measures of powder during the period of transition to the uptake of cartridges. The flintlock should not necessarily mean a move towards cartridges for our period but so far I have seen no examples either illustrated or modelled that allow for bandoliers with flintlocks. If anyone can show me, I'd be beholden. Wilde has the uptake of cartridges 'later' than 1674. Given that by then the marines, Guards and grenadiers were flintlock armed, I'd say there is room in the sculpting world for this inclusion.
Sunday, December 4, 2011
Sunday, September 18, 2011
Research Tips & Future Intent
Research Tips
Anyone wishing to delve deeper into this period or those who have already done so will soon become familiar with the issues surrounding the identification of individuals and units. Whilst search engines of various types within the World Wide Web are an invaluable tool, their limitations are soon determined around issues of spelling. Now I'm no linguist - I speak and write in only one language and at an average level at best - but when looking into this particular period for continental military details, sources or even references within English sources draw upon Dutch, German and French spelling variants which can confuse the monolingual researcher.
By way of example, I was looking for a Colonel Proprietor (Kolonel) for a Dutch regiment by the name of Sander which, whilst obvious to others did not register in my mind as a continental variant of Alexander until all the other details lined up and I enjoyed that 'Aha' moment. There's also the aristocratic titles which vary across the European nations which, if known, may give a tip to the variance in a particular title holder's name.
Then there's the spelling. Again, I'm not particularly knowledgeable about the evolution of languages other than English but if comparable, within these various languages there will be variations in spelling as no standardisation had been achieved at this time. This all confuses the amateur researcher and you can't be too ready to declare a person or unit as present or not at a particular conflict according to 'the record' until other possibilities are exhausted. Also, whilst admittedly reliant upon the previous work of others, one needs to be ever mindful of the possible adoption and repetition of errors and the conversion of theory or supposition to accepted fact over time. My old university training in historical principles always remind me to seek primary over secondary and tertiary sources always - but even first hand accounts can be in error.
I suppose what I'm saying is that I am bound to have missed stuff as I go along and I can't emphasise enough the need amongst us (the small community of interested wargamers) to share knowledge and ideas whilst we assemble a more detailed picture of this previously ignored period of military history.
Future Intent
I will move onto the French order of battle at Seneffe next but do so fearfully. My principle interest for this period is the Dutch and this will be my first army but I do want to build the opposition simultaneously - a demi-brigade each at a time. I would like to guarantee that I will similarly attack the Spanish and Imperial forces but we shall see. Somehow I doubt it. I say I am fearful about the French order of battle because I have not as yet ventured into research here and I doubt I'll be as fortunate to have a French equivalent of the Dutch Regiments Website. Then again, much has been written in the journals of Wargames Illustrated over time on the French army of this period so I may be pleasantly surprised. If anyone has some good website recommendations for me or other works done which is available, please let me know.
Anyone wishing to delve deeper into this period or those who have already done so will soon become familiar with the issues surrounding the identification of individuals and units. Whilst search engines of various types within the World Wide Web are an invaluable tool, their limitations are soon determined around issues of spelling. Now I'm no linguist - I speak and write in only one language and at an average level at best - but when looking into this particular period for continental military details, sources or even references within English sources draw upon Dutch, German and French spelling variants which can confuse the monolingual researcher.
By way of example, I was looking for a Colonel Proprietor (Kolonel) for a Dutch regiment by the name of Sander which, whilst obvious to others did not register in my mind as a continental variant of Alexander until all the other details lined up and I enjoyed that 'Aha' moment. There's also the aristocratic titles which vary across the European nations which, if known, may give a tip to the variance in a particular title holder's name.
Then there's the spelling. Again, I'm not particularly knowledgeable about the evolution of languages other than English but if comparable, within these various languages there will be variations in spelling as no standardisation had been achieved at this time. This all confuses the amateur researcher and you can't be too ready to declare a person or unit as present or not at a particular conflict according to 'the record' until other possibilities are exhausted. Also, whilst admittedly reliant upon the previous work of others, one needs to be ever mindful of the possible adoption and repetition of errors and the conversion of theory or supposition to accepted fact over time. My old university training in historical principles always remind me to seek primary over secondary and tertiary sources always - but even first hand accounts can be in error.
I suppose what I'm saying is that I am bound to have missed stuff as I go along and I can't emphasise enough the need amongst us (the small community of interested wargamers) to share knowledge and ideas whilst we assemble a more detailed picture of this previously ignored period of military history.
Future Intent
I will move onto the French order of battle at Seneffe next but do so fearfully. My principle interest for this period is the Dutch and this will be my first army but I do want to build the opposition simultaneously - a demi-brigade each at a time. I would like to guarantee that I will similarly attack the Spanish and Imperial forces but we shall see. Somehow I doubt it. I say I am fearful about the French order of battle because I have not as yet ventured into research here and I doubt I'll be as fortunate to have a French equivalent of the Dutch Regiments Website. Then again, much has been written in the journals of Wargames Illustrated over time on the French army of this period so I may be pleasantly surprised. If anyone has some good website recommendations for me or other works done which is available, please let me know.
Thursday, September 1, 2011
Pending Posting
Sensitive to the fact that I have been deathly quiet on the blogging front I thought I'd advise that a pending detailed Order of Battle (Orbat) is forth coming for the battle of Seneffe (1674). I'm beginning with the Dutch (United Provinces) principally due to the fact that this will be my first army of the period. As soon as this is fully developed I will commence some significant purchases and endeavour to complete at least my first battalion to demonstrate how the units will appear under this system and my preferred troop scale. Following will be the French, then back to allies with the Imperial forces and Spanish.
The nature of the Order of Battle will be in some detail. I'll go as deep as I can, identifying Kolonel Commandants, regimental numbers and a limited time line with former and subsequent unit and Kolonel Proprietor names which should enable easier identification for those afficianadoes who might cross reference important details like uniform and standards/colours. Certainly that's what I will be doing and will be relying on Sapherson as my earliest point of reference on uniforms.
I've chosen Seneffe due to the breadth of options for units fielded by all sides and having been fought in 1674 puts it nicely within my first period (Early Dutch War) for which I have already generated Dutch and French lists.
I'm drawing on several resources and cross checking them for consistency and will cite them accordingly - not expecting or wanting anyone to take my research at face value. As far as research goes, it is more a collation of the work of others for whome I will credit and link when possible to other sites. As always, I encourage anyone to comment and criticise so I can polish the lists if necessary.
The nature of the Order of Battle will be in some detail. I'll go as deep as I can, identifying Kolonel Commandants, regimental numbers and a limited time line with former and subsequent unit and Kolonel Proprietor names which should enable easier identification for those afficianadoes who might cross reference important details like uniform and standards/colours. Certainly that's what I will be doing and will be relying on Sapherson as my earliest point of reference on uniforms.
I've chosen Seneffe due to the breadth of options for units fielded by all sides and having been fought in 1674 puts it nicely within my first period (Early Dutch War) for which I have already generated Dutch and French lists.
I'm drawing on several resources and cross checking them for consistency and will cite them accordingly - not expecting or wanting anyone to take my research at face value. As far as research goes, it is more a collation of the work of others for whome I will credit and link when possible to other sites. As always, I encourage anyone to comment and criticise so I can polish the lists if necessary.
Friday, July 1, 2011
Confounding
It was brought to my attention by my Goulburn Wargames Group colleague Matt Williamson that my basing convention graphics may be misplacing the command element. What I said? How do you know?
He's on the hunt for his source and some diagrams which accompany it which, when possessed, will be uploaded immediately. In the meantime I'll draw any reader's attention to the fact when deployed to give fire, it may be that the command element moved back, with pikes to the front centre.
Stay tuned.
He's on the hunt for his source and some diagrams which accompany it which, when possessed, will be uploaded immediately. In the meantime I'll draw any reader's attention to the fact when deployed to give fire, it may be that the command element moved back, with pikes to the front centre.
Stay tuned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)