WSS or LOA Hussars and General with Cuirass

Started by abikapi2, 03 February 2019, 09:57:58 PM

Previous topic - Next topic


Quote from: clibinarium on 05 February 2019, 01:10:43 AM
The tapestries give a better example of Churchill's practical field wear.

I didn't bother with hussars for the LoA as they don't really figure in the big battles, and I thought the SYW Austrian hussars were close enough for those that wanted them.

On the tapestries you are probably right but bear in mind the tapestries  are works of art, so not intended necessarily to be accurate, that were done 10 to 20 years after the events by artists who were nowhere near events & little military experience.

abikapi2 has posted some pictures of hussars of this era, the French and other states ones were similar. The main problem is the head wear. I guess you could hack the SYW figures around to get something like this. At this time there were not many hussar units but those that did regularly turned up at battles. The largest number of them were in the Austrian army and so they featured most commonly in their battles. There was a Hungarian revolt during the WSS in which both sides had lots of hussars & also they tended to have a greater role in wars against the Ottomans.

I am not sure it is financially worth the company doing them but I think they would be useful.


Hwiccee, I think you may be somewhat too dismissive ofthe tapestries. A document i discovered on the net entitled "Creativity and Disruption in Brussels tapestry 1698-1706: New data on Jan van Orleyans Judocus de Vos,  by Brosens and Slegten attributes the Victires of Marlborough series to the period 1712-15 for design and production. This is pretty close in time to the events themselves, and I doubt if Marlborough would hav been too tolerant of glaring inaccuracies!
2021 Painting Competition - Winner!


I had not seen this document but it is basically an updated version of earlier works, the ones in footnote 8. I think the key word here is 'about' - the text says the they were produced 'about 1712-15'. The exact dates are unknown and these works are in part trying to establish when they were made. The Wace book mentioned thinks 1712-17 and another source I looked at thinks 1715 -1720. Another thread of the discussions in these works is how original were they? This features in the document you mention as well. In short often some or all of the parts in them, or sometimes the whole thing are, copies of earlier works. I am afraid I didn't bother noting these exactly but it is thought there are copied elements and also a number of factual 'errors' in the various tapestries.

So basically we don't really know when exactly they were designed & produced but the basic point stands it was some time after by a group of artists who were not there, and with probably little military experience - if any. There is good evidence that some of details on them are wrong or at least from something else - they are reused designs from something else. Maybe Marlborough did inspect all the details for inaccuracies but would he remember what exactly he wore at such a battle? Even if he did would he be bothered to change what is a tiny unimportant detail in a work like this, beating in mind that unlike us the vast majority of others looking at the works wouldn't care less about this & would be interested in the rest of it.

These were works of art designed to make the commissioner look good, not some primitive 'photo report'. They clearly 'dramatise' the events and distort the picture as part of the propaganda behind the image that they want to project. Are the images something like right, I would guess yes. Are the exact details right, I would guess no.


Well we might have much to debate on the details, but  at least we can both agree on your last sentence!
2021 Painting Competition - Winner!


02 January 2021, 02:45:19 PM #19 Last Edit: 02 January 2021, 02:51:51 PM by golem
+1 vote  :)

2015 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!