Tuesday, December 16, 2014

Book Review: The Destruction of Lord Raglan

Like so many unlucky generals, Fitzroy Somerset, First Lord Raglan continues to inspire criticism, even antipathy but more often pity and plenty of blame amongst historians, both professional and amateur. Certainly the target of the press in his own time, the good general remains a figure often to be looked down on and judged even today. Whilst somewhat sympathetically portrayed by Sir John Gielgud in Tony Richardson's 1968 motion picture The Charge of the Light Brigade, he remains remembered for being inept; his mind wandering, dithering in imprecision and indecisiveness.

Christopher Hibbert's The Destruction of Lord Raglan, first published by Longmans in 1961 purports to be the first biography of the man central to the folly of the Light Brigade action at Balaclava and the demise of the army of the Crimea. It is a seemingly balanced and empathetic analysis of the man in his times and in his own particular situation.

Necessarily, much of this account is a chronological walk through the Crimean campaign which was historically his defining moment. Dedicating himself to a lifetime of military service, he very much operated in the shadow of his mentor and sponsor, Arthur Wellesley, first Duke of Wellington whose influence over operations of the army extended even beyond that great man's demise. Following in his footsteps, Raglan succeeded as the Commander-in-Chief of the Army. When the call to arms came in 1854, Raglan also was appointed Commander of the Allied Army.

Some time is spent rightly in studying the British army command for the campaign and the inexperience coupled with age and inflexibility of the characters who comprised it. Hibbert is clear on one point particularly when highlighting the limitations and character of Raglan for command, concluding that, "On reflection it seemed that there could only be one choice."

An experienced diplomat and fluent in French, in spite of his lack of field command experience, no one existed at the time who was more suitable to the task in hand. In his negotiations with the strong-willed, bombastic and sometimes dissembling French Marshal St. Arnaud Raglan is assessed as perhaps being too diplomatic. Whilst as CinC Raglan was ultimately responsible for the direction of the campaign, Hibbert is clear that significant tactical failures such as the poorly co-ordinated attack on the Alma or the subsequent strategic failure in following up the Russian forces and storming Sevastopol were down to the insistence of an "incompetent and feckless" St. Arnaud and Raglan's compliance stemming from his interpretation of how best to preserve the alliance in the field. We must also bear in mind that St. Arnaud was in the slow process of dying from cholera but he was in turn succeeded by the brave and popular Canrobert; personal choice of Emperor Napoleon but theatrical and unsuited to high command.

But it is Raglan's direction at Balaclava with which I am primarily  concerned. Unfortunately, Hibbert slips into a shallow recount of the battle narrative with very little analysis of Raglan's direction of the battle beyond the fateful Light Brigade order. It is clear he was severely hampered by Sir George Cathcart's refusal to chivy his infantry division into action and the Duke of Cambridge's similar sluggishness in coming to action. The mishandling of the cavalry division as a whole is largely if not entirely laid at Lucan's feet with his repeated failure to patrol and gain any situational awareness.

Nothing much is made of Raglan's appreciation of the movement of his infantry which is curious given his reference to them in his orders to the cavalry. As they were in effect unable to give support to the cavalry advance, it is surprising that so little is made of this oversight more generally. This is perhaps best dealt with in another posting; however, as Hibbert does not spent more than 21 pages on the battle.

Whilst the work is dedicated to Raglan more generally, I was disappointed with the Balaclava treatment and think much more might have be made of assessing the orders of the day and correspondence after the fact to gain a more comprehensive insight into how the CinC attempted to salvage his position in response to the Russian initiatives. For me, from a purely Balaclava perspective this work remains like the battle results for the allies, and cannot be considered a victory.

Having said that, it remains a valuable addition to my library and I have enjoyed reading it for what it is and was intended to be - the first dedicated treatment of the downfall of Lord Raglan. For what followed after Balaclava; Inkerman, Sabastapol, Raglan's relationship with the press, the government, the army and posterity ... you'll have to read it for yourself.


Saturday, June 7, 2014

Don Cossack (cavalry): Figures Ranges

There a plenty of Cossack ranges out there but many of them are for the renaissance period and wars up to the end of the nineteenth century. So, who makes Don Cossacks that I can use for the Crimean War?

Before continuing, there are a significant array of Cossack ranges which come close. Eureka Miniatures (for example) do a nice range of Don Cossacks for the French Revolutionary Wars. I am sticking closely to the Crimea War period; however, in order to limit conversion requirements. The Eureka figures would require the addition of putty to lengthen the frock coats and the removal of papakha cords for starters and so it is with most sculpts depicting Cossacks before and after our specific period.

Wargames Foundry
Sculpted by Michael and Alan Perry long ago, they offer an unfortunately limited series of poses for generic Cossack cavalrymen all of whom wear a fatigue cap. Superbly sculpted, they conform to the older 25mm size which might not actually translate too badly to the table top along side modern ranges if one identifies their mounts as Steppe ponies.
With only two trooper poses, attempting to furnish an entire regiment with neat, uniformed and uniformly posed figures would not enable me to convey the irregular visual impression I am after for my Cossacks.
The Command set is useful both with and without converting the headdress. Aside from them, the entire and limited range does not readily identify or differentiate between the Cossack Hosts present at Balaclava. I won't mention the stirrups.

The only specifically identified Don Cossacks from Wargames Foundry are an artillery crew and limber set. After them, their offering for Cossacks for this period is exhausted.

Warlord Games

I understand that the evolving range of 28mm figures from Warlord Games is to include the addition of Cossacks. This statement of intent is to be found on their own discussion forum but dates back to February 2012. In the intervening period they have only committed to a gorgeous but slow growing range of British troop types only (Hussars, Lancers and Foot). I will continue to monitor their progress but they appear to be more focused on Napoleonics and WWII for the time being.

Essex Miniatures
RNAP60
An extensive range across many periods: old company with an old series of sculpts. Whilst they don't cover the Crimean War they do have suitable figures from their Russian Napoleonic range. They are simplistic sculpts in comparison to modern styles and in my opinion the poor paint-jobs for their on-line shop doesn't help sell these figures at all. I have experience with Essex Miniatures and find them a solid product which paint up well.


RNAP61

Two lancer variations are offered with a sword wielding third amongst the range. They give a fair representation of the papakha (headdress) minus the pom-pom or plume. The trouser may require extending to the heel for our period but the tunic is about the right length. Reposing these figures is easy given the malleability of their particular white metal alloy. Some modest filing and a bit of putty should take care of most requirements including absenting those misplaced stirrups! Certainly these chaps would make a worthy addition to the irregular ranks of a Don Cossack sotnya.

Perry Miniatures
Always a sought after addition to any 28mm army, we are fortunate that they offer a range of Napoleonic Wars Cossacks, some of which fit the bill nicely.
RN43 Ataman Cossack with Command
Their Ataman Cossack figures are pretty well spot on for the Don Cossacks wearing an oilskin cover cap in lieu of their papakha. Their coats are perhaps a tad long and yet another depiction with stirrups makes me question have I misread something?
RN44 Ataman Cossack winter dress


I believe these figures will fit well for any Don Cossack cavalry of the 54th regiment or above (see my previous research posting on the Don Cossack cavalry). Of course, Perry's do a good variety of wonderfully animated poses.
RN40 Don Cossack Command
Their Don Cossack Command also fits nicely with the unadorned papakha in evidence. I doubt very much if specifically sculpted Cossacks for the Crimean War could be much more fit for purpose.
RN47 Cossacks Skirmishing

Whilst the centre figure is close within their skirmishing pack, they do not provide us with the Caucases fur cap for the Cossack regiments up to and including the 54th regiment. At this time, no one does that I've found.

Great War Miniatures
My favourite range for my Balaclava Build has yet to add to their Russians and include Cossacks. The only option is to brand their light cavalry in caps as Cossacks. Sometimes portrayed as wearing such in illustrations of the Crimean War, this may have been opted for but there is little evidence to confirm this mode of dress. It is certainly the approach adopted by Wargames Foundry (above). If confirmed, the Great War Miniatures sculpts would require removal of the sabre guard and the replacement of at least some sabres with a lance. Of course, some headdresses might be replaced with putty oilskin caps, modelling of uncovered  papakha or the Caucasian fur caps if you're up to the challenge. All in all, it would take some effort to turn these line cavalry figures into Cossacks.

So, as far as I am aware, this is our lot. I am near to deciding on my approach for the 53rd Cossacks. Whilst yet to commit, it will most probably be a mixture of the above. Either way, I will have a lot of hat building to do.

Don Cossacks (cavalry)

 Background
 
What is or was a Cossack by 1854? In ethnic terms, they were generally by this time dominated by Greater Russian peoples. Socially, they were based on nomadic structures but this had been changing for many generations as had their cultural independence.They spoke Russian, observed in their own way Christian Orthodoxy but retained the strong influence of their Tartar origins in custom, law and in the way they waged war.

What is certain is that not all Cossacks were the same and there were most probably significant differences between regiments, Cossack hosts and the specific army they served in. The Don Cossacks were the most significant of the Cossack hosts from the time of the Napoleonic wars. Born to the saddle, a conspicuously high proportion of the male Cossack population (60% plus) was under arms in constant service to the Tzar in return for communal lands. From 1835, service was set at 35 years from the age of nineteen years.

In  real terms, the Cossack people of the Don were a war machine for Russia who were organised and collectively equipped their men for a lifetime of service under arms. What they were not by this period were disparate bands of brigand-like, barely civilized marauder skirmishers - the romantic and outdated concept of the irregular, unreliable maverick scouts in the style of Hollywood's Taras Bulba. Some of these classical traits and customs, identity and behaviours were surely a feature but we need to be careful not to allow mythology to lead us to cliche.
Russian Cossacks taken 1854 by Szathmary (the Royal Collection UK)
If we take a longer look as Szathmary's photo (above) we see a group of quite uniformed and smartly turned out soldiers. Their mounts are not so different from other cavalry as we might have imagined. Though black & white, the photo shows they appear to be attired in the dark blue proffered by the Tsarist government in this period and with little adornment. To be sure, it appears to be a set of officers and staff: there's not a wild fur coat, bandolier or pig-tail in sight. For more detailed discussion further on, their papakha headdress is uncovered and shows the formal red bag and what I make to be signs of several pom-poms or white plumes on the left of the crown rim.

Organisation

Generations of uprisings and successful Tsarist suppression had affected increasing dominance from Moscow in local political power structures and a closer alignment of the Cossack military machine with Imperial Russian military organisation. Nevertheless, they continued to cloth an accoutre themselves for service, albeit more uniformly than in previous periods. Mount and saddlery was an expense born by the Cossack trooper. Whilst furnishing artillery and infantry regiments on campaign, the Don and other Cossack hosts continued to fulfill the irregular cavalry role for which they had long been renown.

The principle organisational unit remained the Sotnya (or sotnie): either a cavalry squadron or infantry company of 100 men. Six sotnya formed a cavalry regiment, most of whom would have mounted their own steppe ponies drawn from their vast herds about the Don. They rode them without stirrups, exerting control through the nagaika (whip).

They had their own rank titles up to Lieutenant-Colonel which mirrored the Imperial army ranks. For my wargaming purposes, it is perhaps only the Lieutenant-Colonel or starshina and major (esaul) whom I need to identify at a 1:20 representative troop scale.

Uniform (or perhaps more accurately: Dress)

Seaton & Youens (The Cossacks, Osprey Men-At-Arms 1972) emphasize the inaccuracy or rather falsehood in artistic depictions of uniformly attired Cossacks at war when compared to the written records and later photographic evidence. Considerable variation in basic clothing within and certainly between sotnyas of a regiment would appear highly likely. Having said that, the above photo of Szathmary's clearly show some smartly turned out and clearly 'uniformed' Cossacks and it appears that some level of uniformity was achieved at this particular time. This was certainly the desire, intent and practice of the Tsarist government in its employment of Cossacks for the first part of the nineteenth century.

Guard Cossack papakha 1790
That item of dress which identifies the Don in the Crimean War from any other type of Cossack is perhaps his headgear: the papakha. A tall cylindrical busby of pressed, rough lambswool, the papakha is Turkish in origin. It is similar to the common Astrakhan cap which is essentially of the same design and material, but the Don papakha is conspicuously taller. The crown was red and sometimes formed a bag which extended some way down the right side. Particular Don Cossack regiments might even include a white pom-pom or plume fixed to the left of the top rim but this may have been mostly for guard regiments and a governmental inclusion in the European style. Thomas & Scollins (The Russian Army of the Crimean War 1854-56, Osprey Men-At-Army no:241) highlights the practice of forming the papakha oilskin cover into a cap of its own for use in the field - see below illustration of 60th Don Cossacks.

Vansen's sketches of 42nd Don Cossacks
The black fur and cloth cap worn in the Caucasus was retained by those regiments who fought in that army which included the first 54 regiments. Vansen's sketch (illustrated right) shows the crown of the cap which would have been red with white piping for the Don regiments.
Mid-ninetheenth century Cossacks (note red crown and piping)

60th Don Cossacks (note the oilskin cap)

The tunic (coat) or tchekman worn by the Cossacks of the Crimean War reflects this particular period of attempts by Moscow to bring greater conformity to Cossack appearance in the field. In the European style, this tunic may have been common beyond the 60th Don Cossacks (illustrated left). Pants were predominately blue with a single and relatively wide red stripe (see Vansen's sketch above). Collar and shoulder straps are blue and red piped generally.

Arms

Don Cossack cavalry had by this period long favoured the lance (without pennon) as their principle weapon. They were armed with a rifle (no bayonet) and a curved sabre (the shashka). Both the Caucasian and Cossack shashka originated in design from the 12th century and was an ornately decorated single edged, curved and hilt-less sword with a counter-curved grip. Wider than the European sabre, the shashka blade is seen often with more than one fuller. Cossacks also took whatever additional arms the individual chose to carry - mostly pistols and knives.

Other References


Vezio Melegari: "The World's Great Regiments" 1968.



Tuesday, June 3, 2014

Szathmary - Crimean Combat Photographer

Carol Pop de Szathmari
Not just in the interests of balance, this site needs to include mention of a man who may be regarded as the world first known combat photographer – Carol Pop de Szathmari (also Szathmáry Pap Károly). Born 11 January 1818 in Cluj, Kolozsvar (modern day Romania) this painter and traveler began working with portrait photography before the war, having developed several ranking contacts through his portraiture. At age 36, he took a specially fitted wagon for developing his photographs, arriving in the Crimea in 1853 to capture the first photographic records of the war – later exhibited at the World Exhibition in 1855.

Unlike Fenton, Szathmari photographed both sides of the early war - recording images of the Russian and Turkish combatants. His works were exhibited, gaining several awards and he was widely reproduced in magazines and print. It is regrettable that most of his works and none of his albums have survived into the 21st century. What few images remain can be found in the British Royal Family’s Royal Collection available for viewing on-line.


The first image shown (left) is from the Royal Collection and depicts Don Cossacks taken in 1854.








The three soldiers depicted next (right) are Ottoman officers - a  Captain, Colonel and Major taken also in 1854.


We are told of the hazards Szathmary encountered as he crossed the lines to expand his portfolio. Near Oltenitza Szathmary had a close encounter with Turkish artillery who it is understood thought him a Russian spy and took some thankfully poorly ranged shots.


Turkish artillery limber and crew (left) taken 1854.









 Turkish artillery officers (right) 1854.






Three pictures can also be found at the International Museum of Photography and Film, George Eastman House (Rochester, New York): "The Russian lancer's encampment in Craiova", "The Bombardment of Silistra" and the portrait of Lieutenant General Soimonoff.

Szathmary was the first certified photographer in Romania and one of the first ten photographers in Europe. He became the official photographer of the Romanian ruler Alexandru Ioan Cuza and of the first king of Romania, Carol I of Romania. Most of his life he worked and lived in Bucharest, where he died in 1887 aged 69.









Sunday, January 12, 2014

My 13th Light Dragoons

Here is my 13th Light Dragoons for Balaclava, or to be precise, A and B squadrons (Troops A, B, D and E). This was almost my last unit painted for 2013 but turned out to be the first completed (to painted stage) for 2014.
I have to confess to knowing the least about this fine regiment of all the Light Brigade regiments that charged at Balaclava. For my army list I have included character references and modelling tips but for this regiment I have nothing special to note. I don't even know who took command of it on the day. The Troops were commanded (in order) by Captains Oldham, Jenyns, Goad and Tremayne.
Whilst described as light buff, the regimental facing are often referred to and depicted as effectively white in the field and on campaign - so white they are.
These are all Great War Miniatures which I have painted as they come with no conversions. I intend replacing future sabres with flattened steel wire but as these were done in my Tongan bungalow, I had to settle for filing the sabres as flat as I dared being without the required tools and anvil.
Unlike my 4th Light Dragoons, I used Humbrol enamel gold (No:16) for all lace. I am happy enough with the results but will return to my Citadel Colour for the three other regiments. Definition of the double breeches stripes and rank chevrons using the toothpick technique works better with the acrylics.
I will post an accompanying historical reference posting for the 13th as I have with the 4th. For completeness, once based I'll amend this post with the final photographs. Next on my list will be the 8th Light Dragoons (uniformed as hussars) for whom I require sculpting a wire haired terrier - should be quite the challenge.
When referring back to my army list (a work in progress) I imagined my regiments to be 16 figures strong with eight figure squadrons. Whilst more appealing visually, it just wasn't practicable when converting that representative troop scale to the Russian infantry.
As I deliberately left my SLR at home for my last two weeks in Tonga, these shots are taken with my trusty Canon PowerShot S70 in the daytime, under lamp lights with no flash, using portrait and macro settings.