General de Brigade

[Ronan the Librarian]

Am I right in thinking that the two battalions of the 1st Foot Guards did not have their greatcoats with them at Quatre Bras and Waterloo? Apparently some regiments had their greatcoats sent back to England, but I am unclear as to why this would have been done, or which other units might have been involved.

I can't find this mentioned anywhere in the Ospre Elite on Wellington's Foot Guards, or any other basic uniform books (including the four-booklets 1970s Almark series on the Guards), but I do recall reading this recently on a forum - just cannot remember which one!

Thanks for any help.

RtL
_________________
You can lead a horse to water, but a toy soldier can no longer be lead (due to Health & Safety Regulations).

[Cliff]

"The General Orders of Field Marshal the Duke of Wellington"
for May 31, 1815 deal with the army's greatcoats (bottom of page 411):

http://books.google.com/books?id=Kf0vAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=WELLINGTON+GENERAL+ORDERS#PPA411,M1

If this order was carried out the whole of the British troops shouldn't have their greatcoats at Waterloo!!
And does this cover any of the other contigents in the army??

Cliff

[Chris Ginn]

I bet a lot of rankers were wishing the Duke was not so considerate, the night before Waterloo.

Does that mean that they did not have that roll on top of their backpacks, or is that a blanket, into which their greycoats would have been rolled if they had them?
_________________
Chris G

[Ronan the Librarian]

Chris - Yes, the roll on top of the backpack is the greatcoat; the blanket was kept in the knapsack. IIRC, Pvte Matthew Clay of the 3rd Guards recorded trying to stow his sodden blanket into his knapsack on the morning of the 18th (he also complains that his musket wouldn't fire as the rain had warped the wood and deformed the spring). He makes no mention of his greatcoat, however.

Cliff - My reason for making a specific reference to the 1st Foot Guards was because I have recently read a thread on another forum (annoyingly cannot recall which one) which made the point that the 2nd and 3rd Guards had their greatcoats, but the 1st did not and wargamers should, to be strictly accurate, cut these off of the backpacks of that particular regiment.
_________________
You can lead a horse to water, but a toy soldier can no longer be lead (due to Health & Safety Regulations).

[Ronan the Librarian]

Ah, just found the thread - over on PMT:-

http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=156294

Scroll down to the posts by "Lord Hill" on 30 November.

Any comments in support/to the contrary?
_________________
You can lead a horse to water, but a toy soldier can no longer be lead (due to Health & Safety Regulations).

[Cliff]

An interesting twist in how the Waterloo British Regts. would look.
First there was the Guard white trousers and now lack of greatcoats!

As mentioned on the TMP, a search thru various order books, memoirs or The Waterloo Letters would maybe reveal which Regts. did or did not have their greatcoats.

Cliff

[Cliff]

Ronan

I just checked a few sources and found in
"Rifles at Waterloo" by G. Caldwell & R. Cooper
the following:

They talk about the uniforms and hardships of the 95th during the campaign and:
"For the troops to suffer so terribly from the rain indicates they were without their greatcoats. George Jones's sketches published in 1816 from those done at the time of the battle seem to confirm this fact, as none of the drawings we have seen show men with greatcoats rolled on top of the knapsack. The 52nd Regt. we know for certain sent their greatcoats on board ship."

I'm not quite sure if the the first part is talking specifically about the 95th, but they do say the 52nd was without greatcoats.

Cliff