Waterloo or not...

[fernando]

Yes, but a wounded may recover and return to battle; thus a good enemy is a dead one.
I like the peas ... not loose, but with meat cubes and poached eggs.

[kronckew]

Originally Posted by fernando

Yes, but a wounded may recover and return to battle; thus a good enemy is a dead one.
I like the peas ... not loose, but with meat cubes and poached eggs.

Medicine in those days was pretty terrible. They'd probably have bled them to strengthen their humours, most died of infection, some recovered tho. Minor wounds were a bit different tho.

A general on horseback that was next to Wellington at Waterloo had his leg taken off at the knee by a roundshot, he looked at Welly and said 'My Dod, sir, I've lost my leg!' - Wellington replied 'My Sod, sir, so you have". The general recoverd, sans a legs tho.

When the movie Zulu came out, people were horrified to learn the Zulu wounded left behind were executed by the Brits. (the Zulu did likewise). This was done frequently as a kindness rather than letting them suffer thru infections they couldn't cure. And of course a bit of revenge thrown in. Hard to condemn them when conditions were so different than the lives we lead now with modern medicine. Heck, the Roman legions had better medical care and a much better chance of survival than an 18-19c and very early 20c soldier. Lister made a big difference.

[fernando]

Watch the "unreal" result of solid shot volleys in this public lamp, after Portuguese regime forces were defeated by the rioters that ended the Monarchy, 5th October 1910.


.

[kronckew]

Originally Posted by fernando

Watch the "unreal" result of solid shot volleys in this public lamp, after Portuguese regime forces were defeated by the rioters that ended the Monarchy, 5th October 1910.


.

Impressive grouping on a narrow target. I'm surprised it didn't break & collapse.

Is that a selfie stick in the lower left just above the staring guy left of the post?

[fernando]

Originally Posted by kronckew

Impressive grouping on a narrow target. I'm surprised it didn't break & collapse.

Is that a selfie stick in the lower left just above the staring guy left of the post?

That i wouldn't know; what i've heard of is that this very dude is anxious waiting for the post to fall ... so that he can escape from it in due time .

[kronckew]

It'd be really neat if that post was still around in the same location.

this iron one in Delhi, India has stood like this, and is corrosion resistant, since around 400 a.d. and was dented by a cannonball in the late 18c. Still there, still hasn't rusted away, tho their is some surface rust in places...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_pillar_of_Delhi

[fernando]

Originally Posted by kronckew

It'd be really neat if that post was still around in the same location...]

Those schmucks didn't know the meaning of culture and proudly replaced it with a brand new one. I guess they wouldn't do it nowadays. It would be a double added value for the monument where it stands by; Restoration of Independence.


.

[David]

Originally Posted by Via Dixiane

When it come to journalists, due to my experience in former Yugoslavia i know that they like to show things according a certain "angle".

Hi folks. Photojournalist here. I have also spend years teaching on the subject in college level programs. So please allow my (hopefully) informed perspective.
Firstly i must hotly debate that journalists "like to show things according a certain "angle"". We "like" nothing of the kind. I would never argue that journalists do not from time to time get caught cheating. People are people and some just don't think the rules apply to them in any field. But it is the aim and goal of the profession on a whole to present straightforward and unadulterated news always. The fact that journalists are summarily dismissed when they are caught misrepresenting their images should be evidence of that.
This said, the ethics of journalism developed and evolved over a long period of time. What was considered allowable in the 19th century was not necessarily the same as the early 20th. By the time of the great days of publications like Life magazine stronger ethics were employed. By the end of the 20th century they were even more strict. Then digital photography came along and the game changed again.
So when we look at Roger Fenton's work we need to understand it's place in the history of photojournalism as the very first extensive photographic coverage of war to be published in newspapers. We also need to consider the equipment used. Large format view cameras with glass plates using a collodion wet plate process. This required that the emulsion placed on the plates be done in the field and that the images be processed immediately after, meaning that besides the large camera, tripod and numerous glass plates he also travelled with a light-tight wagon filled with chemistry. These plates required vey long exposure times of up to a minute so capturing action was out of the question.
I have little doubt the Fenton set up the cannon balls in his "Valley of Death" image (which btw, was not taken in the same location as the classic charge of the Light Brigade despite its name). He began his career as a painter so was quite used to adding or subtracting content from his images at will and back then there really were no rules about what was acceptable to do in the field of journalism. It is therefore very likely that Fenton, who was already hampered by his equipment and process from producing engaging images that illustrated the war, felt that more cannon balls in the frame would indeed help convey the horrors of the battlefield better.
This kind of questionable ethic continued into the Civil War. Some may be aware of the now infamous image by Alexander Gardner known as "Sharpshooter in the Devil's Den". In this image Gardner actually dragged the body into place and placed the rifle at a prominent angle for the final image. Times were different then.
But again, to be clear, none of these practices are acceptable in the today's world of journalism. When they do happen they are the exception and they are quickly called out by the journalistic community and those photographer's careers are generally left in ruins, dependent, of course, on the severity of the offense.

[Jim McDougall]

Im with Wayne, in post #33, the 'swiss cheese' lamppost, that is incredible shot grouping!
As a complete novice in artillery dynamics and photography (especially) I am really curious and would ask the experts here in those fields.
What kind of 'shot' would have the velocity to pierce through what I assume are metal lampposts (though they were probably hollow and formed) in such a clean penetration?
In such a group of almost strategically placed shots, how this post did not collapse is amazing.

Also amazing is that they must have been aiming at the post and not firing in any sort of barrage as there does not appear to be collateral damage in the architecture behind the crowd.

Could such a photo be 'photoshopped' or whatever they in the manner of the innovative things done by renegade photo 'creators' in tabloids etc. these days? I know there were some weird things done with WWI aviation scenes and of course the Conan Doyle hyperbole on 'fairies' etc. ….but could this have been 'created' similarly...….or do we believe it is authentically represented of actual damage?

[fernando]

Great input, David.
In this subject of photo setup scenes, i will force a comparison between placing elements on the ground in a manner to obtain a shocking image and have someone to put up a striking number for a photo, with equivalent intentions. The only difference is that, in the first case you are composing a scene that, although plausible, never took place, while in the other, a similar scene could (could) in fact have happened, only that the photographer hasn't caught it life. In both cases, the journal editor is waiting for something to thrill readers.
Technically both are forgeries, no matter their relative caliber.
If i may repeat myself (per post #9), i was in the presence of that American photojournalist when he asked the youngster (student?) to break the kiosk window, for a photo in a famous (guess which) magazine.
… And mind you, this took place in 1968 = mid XX century.

[fernando]

Jim, in a way i am glad that you are no expert in both artillery dynamics and photography ... for obvious reasons .
If you cared for the details narrated here on the effects of (solid shot) artillery, you wouldn't be surprised that a mid size cannon ball can penetrate a lamp post ... naturally a hollow one, as they all used to be. Neither would we be surprised that the post did not collapse because, being made of some sort of cast iron, would not bend.
Two reasons would explain the impressive quantity of holes in the post. Considering that the rioters had been equipped with nine cannons, after a few hours the number of volleys shot in the same direction would be fairly numerous, those shots on the post not being so implausible. Besides, this was an encounter between nationals; they would either avoid to aim at their keen with precision or, as untrained civilians, didn't have the ability to aim correctly at the target ... adding that the avenue where they were firing from (Liberdade) is rather inclined, a good reason to explain the high aiming.
One last reason to rely on the veracity of this photo is that, in a tiny country like Portugal, there is no Times magazine with their bucks or enough audience to justify a photographer to make up such a fantasy.
And by the way, i don't discern in the picture any background behind the crowd to check for collateral damage in the architecture.
To say that, the only unnatural fact i would admit, is that the (unknown) photographer invited those people to gather behind the post for an historic portrait.


.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by fernando

Jim, in a way i am glad that you are no expert in both artillery dynamics and photography ... for obvious reasons.
If you cared for the details narrated here on the effects of (solid shot) artillery, you wouldn't be surprised that a mid size cannon ball can penetrate a lamp post ... naturally a hollow one, as they all used to be. Neither would we be surprised that the post did not collapse because, being made of some sort of cast iron, would not bend.
Two reasons would explain the impressive quantity of holes in the post. Considering that the rioters had been equipped with nine cannons, after a few hours the number of volleys shot in the same direction would be fairly numerous, those shots on the post not being so implausible. Besides, this was an encounter between nationals; they would either avoid to aim at their keen with precision or, as untrained civilians, didn't have the ability to aim correctly at the target ... adding that the avenue where they were firing from (Liberdade) is rather inclined, a good reason to explain the high aiming.
One last reason to rely on the veracity of this photo is that, in a tiny country like Portugal, there is no Times magazine with their bucks or enough audience to justify a photographer to make up such a fantasy.
And by the way, i don't discern in the picture any background behind the crowd to check for collateral damage in the architecture.
To say that, the only unnatural fact i would admit, is that the (unknown) photographer invited those people to gather behind the post for an historic portrait.


.

I do appreciate this thorough elucidation as well as Davids keen and experienced insight into photojournalism. In studying the historic aspects of arms and armor, in many cases we do have to rely on photographic evidence obviously in more recent (1850s +) instances. In this the skills used in 'historical detection' are used in evaluating images as you guys have described. Most interesting.

I think, in a way, what is most notable or memorable in the well riddled lamp post photo, is as I have mentioned, the extremely well placed penetrations. These hollow steel fluted posts would not, as mentioned, be terribly thick, so the holes do seem logical.
What I meant by 'collateral damage' is the building walls behind the post, which do not seem (to me) to reflect any damage from these solid shots, while the targeted lamp post has seemingly the entire brunt of the barrage. In most cases with photo images of streets where gunfire or especially heavy rounds in any size of ordnance I have seen, there are chunks of walls and sculptured trim or figures blown off.
Just sayin' 'good shootin'.....fire for effect!

What is impressive is that I had always thought there was a modicum of specialized skill in firing artillery, so having such persons among a crowd of rioting people is remarkable. That indeed makes the outcome here 'historic' and the 'target' pole good evidence of such proficiency .

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

... What I meant by 'collateral damage' is the building walls behind the post, which do not seem (to me) to reflect any damage from these solid shots, while the targeted lamp post has seemingly the entire brunt of the barrage...

Jim, i understood you in the first place; just wouldn't figure our what you meant by building walls, as all we can see in the picture is he massive base of the monument. Besides, we must take into account that, the shooting came from the back where the crowd & lamp were pictured. Most probably the back of monument was hit and damaged by the shooting coming from up the avenue, something we couldn't see in the picture and, in any case, must have been repaired.


.

[Jim McDougall]

Thanks Fernando.
Only seeing the corner of some sort of architecture I mistook it for part of a building. I also could not tell which direction the firing came from. This is the hard part of evaluating from photos, especially if there is only a single image without additional detail etc.
With this we can see how images can be misperceived and 'staging' possible without advantage of different vantage points.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by kronckew

True, later high explosives worked better. Actually wounding an enemy is better strategically as it takes more manpower to care for the wounded , more food, etc, too, a dead person just needs a hole, or not even that.

Conceive's rockets were in use in the war of 1812, and included in the US's national anthem (the Rockets red glare).

Apparently they also were under development in the Peninsular war.`

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0deTf57rUqE

I like the flank officer's sword....

Waterloo hospital site to be dug up by team including UK veterans

From The Guardian - Daniel Boffey in Brussels.

Quote"A group of 25 British and Dutch military veterans are to join the first excavation of the main field hospital established by the Duke of Wellington during the Battle of Waterloo. The former soldiers, sailors and RAF personnel will work with archaeologists, led by Prof Tony Pollard of Glasgow …"Unquote.

Thus in keeping with the theme above, of battle injuries inflicted... Something the weapons designers argued with incessantly...hardly surprising ! I note that the main Field Hospital at Waterloo on the British side is being excavated with a big British team to discover among other things what the main injuries were from gunpowder weapons and blades..Thousands of British troops were treated under continuous fire and the injuries were horrific as men were operated on often in the open...gaping laceration wounds inflicted by French Cavalry Swords and massive cannon and bullet wounds were treated all under fire... Most of the dead were cremated (and there are no graves) and after their bones were used as fertilizer by local farmers..

[Jim McDougall]

That is a fascinating perspective on 'battle' and in this case, returning to the original theme of the thread posed toward possible 'Waterloo' provenance of a cannon ball.
The scavenging of battlefields was of course well known practice, and while the initial 'retrieval' of goods was by soldiers, but in their case mostly taking much needed supply materials including clothing or what was required. In most cases, soldiers' kit was meagre and worn or damaged, and they took the opportunity to 'upgrade' or replace their own items.
For example, at Waterloo, one badly wounded soldier was still cognizant in hours after the battle, but his wounds so debilitating he could not speak. He was partially dragged as his boots were pulled off. These were the items precious to the soldiers trying to survive.
Coats, and belts, perhaps ammunition cases etc. would replace items the soldiers had and were damaged or lost during the battle.

Items such as weaponry, and ordnance etc. were most often dragged off by civilian population drawn to the place for retrieval of such goods which could be readily sold as surplus, scrap or sometimes novelties.

Often the ghastly business of 'clean up' of decomposed and further ravaged bodies by predators, beyond the obvious carnage of the wounds that killed these men, was often not done for months and longer. Indeed, the more ghastly treatment of these remains did even include pulverizing of bones into fertilizer.....a matter of fact of the unceremonious disregard for men who fought heroically for their causes.

The case described here of excavation of a field hospital is interesting as the resulting interment of remains was likely situated away from the primary locations of battle, and the lesser volume more reasonably handled.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Incredible as it may seem!~after Waterloo there was a run on false teeth …


Waterloo Teeth – the latest fashion

They say that, on the day after the battle, you couldn’t find a pair of pliers for love nor money. Not for fifty miles around. The new fashion – in London, Paris, Berlin, St. Petersburg and New York – was for dentures fitted with real teeth. And there, on those few square miles of Belgian soil, lay no less than 50,000 potential donors, most of them dead, the rest so close to it that it didn’t much matter. It was the Etruscans, apparently, who first invented dentures – around 700 BC. Teeth from another person or an animal, such as an ox, were inserted into a band of gold with a metal pin and fitted on to the remaining teeth. Dentures remained an option only for the wealthy as they were expensive to make. They appeared again in the 18th Century when sugar addiction had taken a dreadful toll of Europe’s teeth. Fans became popular, not to keep their owners cool, but to waft away the stench of gum disease. False teeth became popular once more. And perhaps the most famous complete set of dentures was that owned by George Washington. It’s pure myth that they were made of wood, of course. In truth, each tooth was carved from ivory, set into lead, and spring-loaded. Uncomfortable! After Waterloo, battlefield casualties became the main source of denture teeth until after the American Civil War. And, after Waterloo, a good incisor could fetch as much as two guineas – the equivalent, today, of around £300.
.

The valiant dead used for fertilize

The most recently discovered casualty of the battle was found in 2012 under a car park during the reconstruction of the Waterloo visitor centre. Historian Gareth Glover has pieced together all the available clues discovered with the skeleton and believes that the soldier was Friedrich Brandt, a Hanoverian fighting with the King’s German Legion. Brandt apparently suffered from curvature of the spine but he was killed by a musket ball – still lodged in his ribs when his body was found. This is the first completely intact skeleton to be found on the site for almost 200 years. And that’s no surprise since, until about fifty years after the battle, companies considered it “fair game” to dig up battlefield dead from their mass graves and grind down their bones for sale to local farmers as fertilizer!

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Please see https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...5&&FORM=VRDGAR which is an excellent piece of detective work... and fascinating comparison of the cannon used by both sides and the effect of the weather. The film also discusses the ground vital to Wellingtons troops and how it was disastrous for Napoleon. Battle casualties and how the British quality of treatment had improved is discussed. The point when Ney who had taken over on the battlefield is examined showing a shocking error of judgement when he ordered a huge attack based on the false personal belief that the British were in retreat. This video is highly recommended.

[Jim McDougall]

Ibrahim thank you for the most interesting look into some of the other aspects of the various 'uses' and perspectives involved in both human remains and battlefield debris outside the 'souvenir' phenomenon.
While it is sometimes difficult to consider the rather dark and sometimes grisly elements of these circumstances, we remember that the weapons we study are also commonly involved in battles and warfare. Looking into the entire scope of these contexts is sometimes necessary for historians of arms, simply for perspective and understanding of the times, though many might consider such views sensationalized and reprehensible.

As someone who has gone through many historic references on battles and military history of campaigns, I always appreciate these insights, however harsh they might seem, as I more appreciate what these people went through.

I think of the apocryphal quote by Robert E. Lee , Confederate General (1862) ..
"...it is well that war is so terrible- lest we grow too fond of it".

And on the opposing Union side, General William Sherman,
"...war is hell".
That brief version removes the full context of what he actually said..
"...I am tired and sick of war. It's glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have never fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for vengeance and desolation. War is hell. "

[kronckew]

The only thing worse than a battle lost is a battle won. Arthur Wellesley, Aftermath of the Battle of Waterloo, 1815.

Wellesley deliberately picked the battlefield, Napoleon was not at his best and did NOT know the field. The Duke planned the whole thing, including feigning the retreat, but it still was a close thing and had the Prussians been a bit late, or the intervening ground not soggy, we might all be speaking French.

Of course, he couldn't have done it without Col. Sharpe.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4_1a6pBPIU

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Armour of a cuirasse du carabinier holed by a cannonball ..Waterloo.

[kronckew]

OUCH!

Bet that stung. probably for not very long tho. It's just a flesh wound.

A little duck tape, bit of baling wire, and some brass paint & the curass will be almost like new