Waterloo or not...

[Via Dixiane]

hi everyone,

that's great, i learnt quite a few things thanks to all of you.

The reason i had to believe it came from Waterloo in the first place was that there are quite a lot a memorabilia from it. I did not know the Crimean war also had the same phenomenon.

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

[fernando]

You are welcome to show us further acquisitions, Va Dixiane .

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Via Dixiane

hi everyone,

that's great, i learnt quite a few things thanks to all of you.

The reason i had to believe it came from Waterloo in the first place was that there are quite a lot a memorabilia from it. I did not know the Crimean war also had the same phenomenon.

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

I am glad for what I could add here, and while the display apparently was not from Waterloo as you had hoped, the Crimean War was also rich in historical context. For me personally it was exciting to revisit the extensive research I enjoyed on both over many years. The memorabilia phenomenon is of course pretty universal in the human experience as nostalgia and curiosity effects most people in one way or another.

I thank you for sharing this item here, and giving us a chance to learn from it.

I would add that it seems a number of these 'arrangements' of ordnance from Crimean War context appear to be 'marketed' online with similar setup and brass plaques.
Perhaps these might imitate earlier such displays of actual souvenirs from the Crimea which became prototypes for these 'marketed' arrangements.

An interesting instance found under "War Tourism" (Wiki):
"...during the Crimean War, tourists led by Mark Twain visited the wrecked city of Sevastopol- he even scolded his travel mates for walking off with SOUVENIR SHRAPNEL".

It would seem that while there MAY have been authentic such displays of such materials in those times.....obviously as with all manner of militaria and these kinds of items, one must be aware of the constant presence of modern creations of same.

There is no harm in optimism in observing items shown, however all possibilities must be considered equally. Discussing an item toward its inherent historical potential whether authentic or not is not necessarily the concern of the discussion, for some of us it is the history being represented that is important.
To each his own, and for collectors, as always.....caveat emptor.

[kronckew]

Was enthralled by Errol Flynn's Charge of the Light Brigade, and the movies about the Wooden Ships and Iron men of the age of sail and their weapons, as well as the famous 'last stands' from Leonidas at Thermopylae onwards.

Wastched a movie a few days ago about 21 Sikh warriors in the British army making a last stand in a outpost fort in afghanistan against 10,000 pathans for days, to allow the Brits time to come up the Khyber with reinforcements for the main Skh regiment. They died to a man, but took hundreds of the enemy with them before running out of ammo, and then took quite a few before the died with cold steel.

Grapeshot is fairly large, was arranged around a central wooden rod set in a wooden base sabot, and wrapped in a canvas cover. Cannister was also coming into fashion, with musket balls in a ton 'cannister'. all last ditch shots as you were about to be overrun. You had more chance not to be when breech loaders ballowed faster reloads before they swamped you. Colonel Shrapnel's invention with the bombs bursting in the air were deadly at longer ranges. cased shells with timed shrapnel warheads provides a blast of balls in a wide oval at very long ranges and were the age's cluster bombs. especially useful with the new rapid breech loading recoil damped pieces from the end of the 19c. I seem to recall cannister was used by US & Allied forces in the pacific WW2, Korea, and also in Vietnam.

below are a batch of grape charges for a 9-pounder naval gun, cased cannister, and a cutaway of a shrapnel round shot, and a modern ogival artillery round.

[fernando]

Governor, history is profuse in narrating epic episodes in that a handful of dudes defended a post from the assault of a zillion foes.
We know of some that would put Leonidas far back in the queue for the Guiness . I gather that, the difference between facts and myth often resides in the ratio of combatants allegedly registered in either side.

The ammo business ...
Grapeshot and shrapnell were both (also) used in the Peninsular war, together with canister, which curiously we call lanternetas (small lanterns). Wellington was not fond of shrapnell, which he personally checked that its effect wasn't lethal enough; plenty wounds but ... not deadly as should. He saw General Simon being hit by shrapnell in his face and head; the bullets were removed like it is done when one accidently gets hit by birth shot in the face whilst duck hunting (SIC); not actually seriously wounded. When he heard that in Badajoz they used such grenades with the 24 pounders as a solution, he ordered that cannons of equal caliber were loaded with musket balls, to obviate such system flaws and ensure that the wounds did in fact incapacitate the ones that received them.
One not so talked about apparatus that became a latter occasional addition (1823-1814) in this war was the explosive rocket, invented by Baronet Sir William Congreve.

.

[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....

[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.

[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.

[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.