SYW Wargame Campaign Report: Week 2

The Austrians besiege Neisse (drawn on a digital copy of an archival map)

Dear Reader,

Today, we are continuing the coverage of the Seven Years War campaign I have been running since the middle of March. Today's report covers events between March 24th (the aftermath of the Battle of Posen) and March 31st. This week as a busy and eventful one. Only one small tabletop skirmish occurred, but there was much maneuvering, and the beginnings of an important siege operation.

In grand terms, this week saw the Austrians continue to develop their offensive in Upper Silesia, while raiding and gather intelligence at the county of Glatz. The Russians, after pausing to recover after their minor defeat at Posen, resumed their offensive, shifting forces westward in an effort to threaten Lower Silesia and Brandenburg. The Prussians, not to be outdone, shifted forces and prepared for another attack, and in the south, launched raiding efforts of their own.

Beginning in the northern theater, the Prussian and Russian armies glowered at one another after the sharp but indecisive battle at Posen. After waiting out the period of enforced inaction after a indecisive battle like this, both the Prussians and Russians began moving south and west. The Russian main army, under the command of General Zahkar Tchernychev, moved forward towards Schwibus, reaching that city on the March 30th (Day 6 of Week 2). The Russian wounded, and the Corps of Observation, under the command of General Buturlin, advanced a few days later, reaching the neighborhood of Tirschtigel by Day 7.

For their part, the Prussian army under King Frederick marched south along the road to Czempin, and reached area of Zullichau by Day 7. A smaller force under the dashing hussar General Ziethen, after rebuffing the challenge of a duel by a disgruntled Russian officer, rode to Kargow, reach that place and reunifying with the Royal Army by Day 7. The stage was set for a significant encounter, which would make Posen look like a mere opening skirmish.

In the southern theater, both armies maneuvered. The Duke of Bevern, after collecting reinforcements for his Prussian army at Schweidnitz, sent out a raiding party into Bohemia via the pass at Landshut-Trantenau (the slight a many a bloody encounter, both historical and wargame). This raiding party ended their advance at the city of Königgrätz, which although possessed of medieval walls, treated with the Hussars, and allowed them to occupy the city.

The Duke of Bevern's main force, after completing taking on reinforcements, advanced into Lower Silesia by way of Reichenbach and Frankenstein. During this same week, the Austrian advanced into Upper Silesia with their main body, and the County of Glatz with a raiding party led by brilliant Franz Moritz von Lacy. The garrison of Glatz attempted to resist the passage of this raiding party, but were rebuffed and forced to withdraw inside the fortress after a minor skirmish.

The skirmish between Lacy's forces and the Glatz Garrison

Lacy's forces, after this skirmish, advanced to Frankenstein, but learning of Bevern's approach, immediately retreated to rejoin the main army at Neisse. Bevern, for his part, continued his advance into the County of Glatz.  The Austrian main army, advancing in stages from Sternberg to Neisse, approached Neisse on March 29th (Day 5) and began siege operations. They called upon the commanding officer, GL von Tresckow, to surrender the place.[1]

Having dealt with the formalities, the Austrians began the serious business of besieging the place, laying parallels and approaches, in two formal fronts of attack. The first was directed against Fort Preussen, north of the city, the second was directed against the southeastern defenses of the city.

The stage was set for confrontation in both the northern and southern theaters. Will General Tchernychev finally manage to put the Mayor of Berlin in his rightful place? How long can the valiant von Tresckow hold out in the face of Austrian depravity? Will Lacy finally be given the full command of a field army he so richly deserves? Tune in next week to find out.

If you enjoyed this post, or any of our other posts, please consider liking us on facebook, or following us on twitter. Consider checking out our exclusive content on Patreon. Finally, we are dedicated to keeping Kabinettskriege ad-free. In order to assist with this, please consider supporting us via the donate button in the upper right-hand corner of the page. As always:

Thanks for Reading, 

Alex Burns

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1]Daun wrote Tresckow: 

To the Esteemed GL Joachim Christian von Tresckow,

It is an honor to be facing such a worthy opponent as yourself in this current campaign. However, you must surely see that before you lies a mighty host, innumerably greater than that of your own. Though you must do your duty to God and King, perhaps another time and place would be more fitting for your admirable skills. You must surely know that this is an inescapable conclusion. The city you occupy rightfully belongs to my Empress, Maria Theresa, and she will stop at nothing to reclaim what is rightfully hers. As leader of her army I have been entrusted to accomplish this task. It would be foolhardy to resist such great power with so little force at hand. War is a bloody and destructive affair; I plead for civility and to avoid needless, wanton death and carnage.

To demonstrate my civility and magnanimity I offer you generous terms. Surrender your garrison at once and I will allow you an honorable withdrawal. Your men may take personal items and their arms, in addition to one, singular cannon as a token of honor. You will be allowed free passage northward and will carry a note from me to your King. All roads to east and west are guarded, and any attempt to join your force with that in Glatz or Kosel will be deemed a violation of our terms and met with hostility.

I give you to the end of this day to make your decision. If you decline this generous offer, or fail to respond in time, I will retake this city by any means necessary. I cannot safeguard you or your men in such a case. You are isolated with no chance of reinforcement. The choice now lies at your feet: save yourself and your men to fight another day, or risk your lives in a pointless show of honor. Heed my mercy or face my wrath."

With Respect,

Feldmarshal Graf Leopold von Daun

Tresckow replied: 

To the Highborn Lord and Feldmarschall Graf Leopold von Daun,

The honor to face a worthy opponent is mine. Your reputation as a skilled warmaster has gone far and wide throughout the empire. The claims of your exalted mistress, Empress Maria Theresa, are in contradiction with those of my Royal Master, King Frederick II of Prussia. He was awarded this city under treaty of Breslau, and confirmed in the treaty of Dresden. You are trespassing in this country, and should return to whence you came.

At this time, I must refuse your terms. I have the earnest prospect of relief for this fortress, and as a result, it would be a betrayal of my prince's trust to surrender at this early date. However, before the commencement of the hostilities, I must ask that we come to some agreement regarding the treatment of wounded and prisoners. I will feed your prisoners and administer medicine to your wounded if you will agree to the same. I look forward to your response, and to making your acquaintance as a friend. With the greatest esteem,

 Generalleutnant Joachim Christian von Tresckow

SYW Wargame Campaign Report: Background and Week 1

Portion of Russian Briefing before the Battle of Posen

Dear Reader,

With the beginning of social distancing (I was transferred from in-person to online work over 1 month ago),  I began to think about returning to a wargaming campaign which I had run in the Spring Semester of 2015 with my undergraduate students at Indiana Wesleyan University. This campaign, which takes place during the Seven Years War, pits several teams against one another in both map and tabletop combat (my students in 2015 actually used video games to resolve the combat).

This time, helped by a veteran colleague, I invited a number of academics, professors, wargame designers, and lifelong wargamers to join in the scenario. As opposed to my students in 2015, were I ran a simulation based upon the year 1762, here we chose a more generic scenario earlier in the Seven Years War, based upon a alternate 1758.

The campaign is played on this period map of the province of Sileisa from 1804; as you will see in a few weeks, the campaign has now been expanded to include the entire theater of war. Beginning on Saturday, March 21st, three teams (the Austrians, the Prussians, and the Russians) began movements on the map. I will be reporting on this campaign for as long as it lasts.

Background: 

For obvious reasons, I am not going to identify any of the participants by name, but rather refer to them by the historical counterparts they represent. The principal cast of characters include:

The Austrians:

Empress Maria Theresa (Represented by FM Neipperg in theater)

FM. Leopold von Daun

FML. Moritz von Lacy

FML. Ernst Gideon von Loudon

Gen d' Kav. Giovan Battista Serbelloni

The Prussians: 

King Frederick II of Prussia

GL Joachim von Ziethen

GL August Wilhelm von Braunschweig-Bevern

Prince Henri of Prussia

FM James von Keith

GL Christoph Burgrave von und zu Dohna

The Russians: 

Empress Elizabeth Petrovna (Represented by General Tottleben in theater)

FM Alexander Buturlin

FM Piotr Saltykov

GM Zahkar Tchernychev

GL Piotr Rumyantsev 

The initial deployments were as follows: The Russian army (~60,000) at Gnesen, the Prussian Army (~80,000) at Gr. Glogau with additional garrison forces across the map, and the Austrian Army (~90,000 men) at Brunn, in addition to large garrisons at Brünn and Olmütz. Some teams had offensive (cities that must be taken) and defensive (cities that must be held) objectives, while others only had offensive objectives. 

Each of these armies had specific compositions, but to avoid giving anything away to the players who are still in progress, I will not be providing the specific army lists. 

Week 1 in the Northern sector

Week 1

In various stages, the various armies began to move into action, starting on the

21st of March (1758).  The Prussian King divided his army into two portions, with the larger portion (~60,000) marching directly at Posen at a breakneck pace. The smaller portion took a slightly slower pace towards Schweidnitz (~20,000). The Russian army, slow to the march, began moving towards Posen on day 2. On day 3, the Russian army reached Posen, and was informed that the Prussian army was on their doorstep. The Russian commander, General Buturlin, was given the options of 1) a safe retreat over the Warta via abandoning the baggage train, 2) the ability to retreat most of the army and the baggage train via a rearguard action, 3) fighting the King of Prussia with the entire army. General Buturlin, chose 3), and dug in as best he could. This brought on a general action to the southwest of Posen. An overall situation map was provided to each commander, with the Russian map being reproduced below:

Russian briefing map, Battle of Posen

The resulting battle was sharp but short. The Prussians, advancing in three columns, deployed and attacked on the Russian right flank. 

The Prussian Army (left foreground) prepares to attack

This attack led to heavy fighting over earthworks and hedges in that sector of the battlefield cost the Prussians a number of their best troops, as grenadiers battalions were fed into the maelstrom. 

This deadly bargain paid dividends, however, as the Russian right was jackknifed further from its original position. In an assault by the Prussian center column won the day, a Frei-Infanterie battalion captured a battery of heavy guns, and the Russian army reeled from the battlefield, more disorganized than truly beaten. 

A Frei-Infanterie Battalion storms the Russian position

The butchers bills was light, considering the nature of the fighting. Approximately 12,000 Prussians and 15,000 Russians became casualties, with many of these lightly wounded and returning to service within the next few weeks. 3,000 Russians were captured by the Prussian Army.  The Russians retired to the north, leaving the Prussian army to lick its wounds on the battlefield. 

In the southern sector of the map, the Austrians advanced from Brünn, pushing out advanced troops and parties of grenzers and hussars to gather information, and taking a powerful train of artillery in tow. No major conflicts occurred in the southern part of the map of the first week, and indeed, by the end of the first week, the Austrian main army, (~90,000) was preparing to debouche from the Moravian foothills in the vicinity of the important fortress of Neisse. Tune in next week for a continuation of this series. 

If you enjoyed this post, or any of our other posts, please consider liking us on facebook, or following us on twitter. Consider checking out our exclusive content on Patreon. Finally, we are dedicated to keeping Kabinettskriege ad-free. In order to assist with this, please consider supporting us via the donate button in the upper right-hand corner of the page. As always:

Thanks for Reading, 

Alex Burns

Historian Interview: Robbie MacNiven

Robbie at the Culloden Battlefield

Today, we are going to our historian interviews. By the time this series concludes in early May, we will have heard from Nick Kane, Ben Bartgis, Robbie MacNiven and Jonathan Abel. All of these individuals are broadly interested in the Kabinettskriege era, and have been selected as a result of recent promotion, impending graduate school applications, or work recently begun in graduate school or at a historic site. Today's young historian is Robbie MacNiven, a historian who researches the British Army in the era of the War of Independence. Robbie graduated in 2014 from the University of Edinburgh, and is now finishing his Ph.D, studying the era of the American Revolution.

 Alexander Burns: What drew you to study the history in this era? In 2018, much of popular memory of military history in the United States is focused on World War 1, World War 2, and the Vietnam War. What about the history of the 1648-1789 era do you find so compelling?

Robbie MacNiven: My father served 22 years in the British Army, so growing up I was very aware of military history. I developed an early fascination with the subject through various mediums – accidentally flipping the channel to the 1993 film Gettysburg when I was five years old, or playing the historical PC game Age of Empires, or starting to read Bernard Cornwell’s Sharpe novels aged 12. During my early teen years I developed an interest that started in the early nineteenth century and then gradually worked its way back the way to the late sixteenth. General British history tends to be very focussed on the World Wars, but the Napoleonic era is also still very popular – I think someone did a study of literature whose main focus is just the battle of Waterloo, and found there had been about 3,000 publications on that subject alone in the last two hundred years! That was my initial entry point.

AB: Is there a particular person, conflict, event, or geographical setting which draws you to this era?

RM: Around the age of 15 I watched the film The Patriot for the first time, which introduced me to a rather fanciful depiction based off Lieutenant Colonel Banastre Tarleton. I became fascinated with him and with how his image differed (and occasionally matched) the character that was created in America both during the Revolution and after. I wrote my undergraduate dissertation about the Battle of Waxhaws. That in turn crystallized a broader interest in the close study of the British Army during the American Revolution.

AB: How do you plan to continue your research into this era? You’ve studied history at the postgraduate level, and are working on a number of projects related to the era. Why have you chosen your particular path?

Robbie MacNiven

RM: I’m not sure about a particular path, but at the moment I’m not gunning to go into academia straight after graduation. Between undergrad, my Masters and the PhD I will have been at university for a decade. I’m currently writing fiction full time (mostly fantasy and sci-fi novels), but not pursuing an academic career doesn’t mean I won’t be continuing my studies in my spare time. I’ve just finished a book for Osprey Publishing about British Light Infantry during the American Revolution, and I’m contracted for a second book about the broader tactics of the Revolutionary War, covering the British, German, Patriot and French armies. Writing is my passion, whether it’s fiction or non-fiction, and I’m very grateful that I’m currently able to do it as my job. Hopefully that continues.

AB: What challenges have you faced in the historical profession? What, if any, advice would you give to high school and college students considering this field?

RM: In terms of advice I’d say follow your passion. It sounds clichéd, but it’s the sort of thing you hear for a good reason. University can be tough, and you really need an interest that anchors you, that’s going to get you through all the research and the deadlines. If you find the subject really captivating then you’ve got the building blocks of an academic career.

If you’re just starting out, I’d advise you to make good use of your supervisors. Don’t be intimidated by them – they’re there to help, and they want you to succeed more than anyone. I followed the advice of mine closely, but don’t be afraid to give a bit of pushback as well. You need to be able to develop and defend your own views. It’s something of a tightrope, but it gets easier after the first or second year.

Also, don’t forget to have fun! Studying can be all-consuming. Schedule breaks and stick to them!

AB: What have you been reading, recently? Could you recommend one book on your topic of interest, or any recent work on the era?

RM: Currently I’m helping proofread a manuscript for Don Hagist about the experiences of regular British soldiers during the American Revolution. It’s going to be an absolutely brilliant book and a great addition to the field, so keep an eye out for its release!

As for recommending one book, I’m going to cheat and recommend five, for anyone who wants to know more about the British military during the Revolutionary period:

British Soldiers American War by Don Hagist

The Men Who Lost America by Andrew O’Shaughnessey

Fusiliers by Mark Urban

With Zeal and With Bayonets Only by Matthew H. Spring

Lastly, it’s not specifically British Army-focused, but Holger Hoock’s Scars of Independence is a really great reassessment of the Revolution.  

AB: Thanks so much Robbie! We look forward to following your career as it continues!

If you enjoyed this post, or any of our other posts, please consider liking us on facebook, or following us on twitter. Consider checking out our exclusive content on Patreon. Finally, we are dedicated to keeping Kabinettskriege ad-free. In order to assist with this, please consider supporting us via the donate button in the upper right-hand corner of the page. As always:

Thanks for Reading, 

Alex Burns

Historian Spotlight: Ben Bartgis

Ben volunteering at a historic site as a book binder

Today, we are going to begin the first of a series of interviews with a number of historians, in various stages of their careers. By the time this series concludes in late April, we will have heard from Nick Kane, Ben Bartgis and Robbie MacNiven. All of these individuals are broadly interested in the Kabinettskriege era, and have been selected as a result of recent promotion, career success, entry into graduate school, new scholarly projects, or work recently begun in graduate school or at a historic site.. Today's young historian is Ben Bartgis, a conservator at a large government archive and independent public historian.

Alexander Burns : What drew you to study the history in this era? In 2018, much of popular memory of military history in the United States is focused on World War 1, World War 2, and the Vietnam War. What about the history of the 1648-1789 era do you find so compelling?

Ben Bartgis: While most people in the reenacting world know me through my work teaching penmanship or reproducing book and stationery materials, my “real life” career for the last 12 years has been in conservation, which has meant working directly with original books and documents on a day-to-day basis and studying their physical aspects closely in the course of a conservation treatment, from writing a condition report, to photo-documentation in visible, UV, and IR light, to the treatments themselves. Both the first institution where I worked as an apprentice book conservation technician and the present institution I work at have extensive 18th century collections, and in the course of learning about iron gall ink, papermaking, leather tanning, wafer seals, and bookbinding as part of my conservation training I became interested in the context that the documents and books I work with were created in. I suppose part of my fascination with the long 18th century simply has to do with so much of my career happening to involve documents from that time period, especially at my current job where I’m focused a lot on documents from 1775-1795.

More broadly, America between 1740 and 1820 is a time when educational pedagogy undergoes a slow and steady revolution as people reconsider who gets to be educated and for what ends. At the same time that this expansion in literacy happens, wider trade networks and increasing prosperity alters the ways that the material objects of literacy were created and consumed. It’s a world that can be startlingly familiar in some ways - the practice sheets that people used to learn cursive are very similar to modern ones - yet uneasily foreign, and that tension is what pulls me more narrowly to 1770-1800 in particular.

The types of objects that Ben works to conserve

AB: Is there a particular person, conflict, event, or geographical setting which draws you to this era?

BB: I’m not drawn to any particular person, conflict, or event, but my interest is definitely in the material culture - the objects themselves and the processes involved in creating the paper, stationery, books, and newspapers of the period in general. On a geographic level I’m particularly interested in how they differed between Britain and her North American colonies - the differences between British and continental paper and early American paper, or how the colonial reliance on imports affected the bookbinding trade in North America versus how it was practiced in London.

AB: How do you plan to continue your research into this era? How does your work in conservation match up with your particular interest in history? Why have you chosen your particular path?

BB: My work in conservation doesn’t always match up with my interest in history - first, my institution is a pretty big one so we get a huge variety of projects, and sometimes I’ll spend weeks vacuuming mold off of late 19th century records, flattening hundreds of mid-20th century photos, or ordering supplies because that’s what the job requires. Second, conservation is a terrible field to be in if you’re interested in what’s on the items you’re working with! A lot of our work is done on the backs of things to make repairs less visible so I mostly see shades of cream and beige all day. Finally, part of the discipline of the job is learning to not read what you’re working on so you can complete your work without being distracted - one former supervisor saw my ability to read secretary hand and Latin as a liability, not an asset, and there was a degree to which she was right. It can be really hard to work with key documents of American history and not even have the time to be able to appreciate being with them, much less read them, but that’s the job.

A Bandbox Seller by Paul Sandby

I’ve chosen my particular path because at the end of the day I love working with my hands, and I don’t like the prospect of giving up my workbench and tools for a job with just computer work - and indeed, now that I’m teleworking full time for the duration of the pandemic I’m discovering just how much I miss the hands-on aspect of my job.

But on the positive side, since I can’t take original documents home I requested to spend some of my work time on some of the blog content generation and transcription projects going on elsewhere in my agency. I am hoping to collaborate with several of my colleagues and write some short articles about the writing materials used by the Continental Congress and early federal government, which means that for the first time in my career I’ll be able to wear my historian hat at my real job!

I’ve had to put all my research trips on hold, so I’ve been revisiting several landmark works in my field, such as David Pearson’s “English Bookbinding Styles 1450-1800” and Dard Hunter’s 

“Papermaking: The History and Technique of an Ancient Craft”. I’ve also spent a lot of time over the last few weeks doing the sort of work that you need to do as an artisan - just sitting down and making things, particularly pasteboard boxes, wafer seals, and vellum ledger books.

Ben's interpretation of the Sandby Image

AB: What challenges have you faced in the historical profession? What, if any, advice would you give to high school and college students considering this field?

BB: Not being a student, professor, librarian, or curator at a university or museum creates a lot of practical barriers to accessing common scholarly resources such as JSTOR, digital collections that require subscriptions, discounted memberships to journals, conference and research funding, and scholarships and fellowships. These barriers to access are common ones faced by a lot of non-traditional public historians, especially people working as artisans or in living history. Additionally, because my work as a historian doesn’t overlap with my real job I have to use my vacation time and savings if I want to speak at a conference, teach a workshop, or make a research trip, and I have to build connections outside the context of the people I know in conservation since I don’t work directly with curators or researchers.

 I am fortunate because I have access to a university interlibrary loan program through my institution, I’ve been able to build connections with the curators and librarians that I’ve met through living history to gain physical access to collections, and I have several mentors who are willing to take the time from their busy lives as PhD candidates or historians to direct my reading, refine my historiography, and include me in the academic dialogues I otherwise don’t have access to. If you’re not in traditional academia and want access to top-quality scholarship and scholars, build those relationships - and living history is an excellent way to do so through finding historians who bring their knowledge to public history events.

 My advice to high school and college students considering the field is rather mercenary due to my personal experience as someone who had to work through college and was unable to afford the unpaid internships that would’ve advanced my career faster: can you afford it without going deeply into debt, and do you need to do something you love for a living even if it means a high level of financial and personal instability? History is a field where deep, passionate engagement with the subject is possible without acquiring a lot of student debt for an MA or undertaking the poorly-paid labor of love that is being a museum interpreter or TA, but to have a deep, rewarding relationship with history outside of the framework of a university or job you also have to be willing to make your own curriculum and be extremely self-directed, committed, and internally driven.

The most recent book that I’ve finished is “The Living History Anthology: Perspectives from ALHFAM”, which I reviewed for the May volume of The Public Historian, the journal of the National Council on Public History. “The Living History Anthology” covered a wide range of topics from the practical to the theoretical. I’d recommend it to anyone in reenacting or interpretation who is looking for an introduction to thinking more critically about doing living history. The anthology has the benefit of being in the convenient form of 26 short essays, with a good bibliography for further reading.

A recent publication in my area of interest that I enjoyed is Joseph Adelman’s 2019 book “Revolutionary Networks: The Business and Politics of Printing the News, 1763–1789”, which among other things gives a succinct summary of how an 18th century print shop worked on a day-to-day basis that is an extremely handy reference, as well as clarifying the economic pressures printers were subject to over the course of the 1760s, 70s, and 80s. Adelman does an excellent job of looking critically at the evolution of historical thinking about the roles printers and the news played in creating the American Revolution from the late 18th century to the present, and provides a compelling narrative framing to the 1763-1783 period by looking at the printers who created many of the primary documents we now reference in our research, and the context in which they created those documents.

 For those interested in printing and its related subjects Adelman was interviewed for two podcasts with the Omohundro Institute’s Ben Franklin’s World Podcast, one on his book and the other on the 18th century American postal system.

AB: Thanks so much Ben! Good luck with your conservation work, we are looking forward to following your career as it continues!

If you enjoyed this post, or any of our other posts, please consider liking us on facebook, or following us on twitter. Consider checking out our exclusive content on Patreon. Finally, we are dedicated to keeping Kabinettskriege ad-free. In order to assist with this, please consider supporting us via the donate button in the upper right-hand corner of the page. As always:

Thanks for Reading, 

Alex Burns

Jung Fritz vs. Alte Fritz: Change over Time in Frederick the Great's Style

Frederick the Great, painted during the Seven Years War

Dear Reader,

Today, the image of Frederick the Great of Prussia has been indelibly burned into our collective consciousness as "Old Fritz", a wizened skinny old man on a small horse, directing the troops with flourishes of his cane. This image of Frederick stays with us for a number of reasons: it is the last one present in living memory, it is the image of Frederick immortalized in the Nazi-era films starring actor Otto Gebuhr, and it is the face of Frederick we see in his death mask. This view of Frederick has even led to fame for prominent reenactors who capture this version of the King. Importantly, this is not the only version of Frederick the Great, nor the style that the King seems to have been wearing during the Seven Years War. Before 1763, Frederick II was almost always painted in his dress uniform for the 1st Battalion of Guards. After 1763, Frederick seems to have preferred his undress uniform, and this is the image of Frederick that has come down to us. 

This post will examine the preferred clothing of Frederick the Great throughout this life: first examining the surviving uniforms of Frederick II, and then examining period artwork from two phases in Frederick's life. Obviously, for researching the martial material culture of this period, there is no substitute for the two volume study of Daniel Hohrath, and the many volume studies of Hans Bleckwenn. For this project, though, I was inspired my the recent dissertation of Adam Storring, and his suggestion that especially early in his life, Frederick was fond of flashy uniforms and baroque finery.

What Remains: Surviving Uniforms of Frederick II

There are a number of surviving uniforms worn by Frederick II. The Deutsches Historisches Museum in Berlin contains both the dress and undress uniforms of Frederick the Great. The undress uniform dates from 1786, the dress uniform is undated. Burg Hohenzollern in Baden-Württemberg likewise contains an undress uniform dating from the later portion of the reign.  Below, I have included three images of coats attributed to Frederick the Great, and one which is not attributed to him, for comparison.

(Undress) Uniform of Frederick the Great (DHM) 

(Undress) Uniform of Frederick II of Prussia (Burg Hohenzollern)

Velvet dress uniform of Frederick II (faded, no date)

1st Battalion of Guards Officer's dress coat, unfaded (1786, not attributed
to Frederick)

The Devil We Know: Old Fritz
Old Fritz. This is the image of Frederick that we are most comfortable with. This version of Frederick spawned innumerable paintings in the nineteenth century, where a thin, hook-nosed Frederick stares at us with a wizened and wrinkled face. This image of Frederick the Great was immortalized in the paintings of Daniel Chodowiecki, who drew the king in the 1780s, at the end of his life.

A painting after Chodowiecki's famous woodcut

 This image of Frederick is a useful one, and the iconic one: the plain, buttoned over coat, the simple ornamentation of his order of the Black Eagle, the cane and unlaced cocked hat. This is also the Frederick we see in the portraits of J.H.C. Franke, who was certainly working after the Seven Years War, possibly as early as 1763.

Franke's portrait.

Young Fritz: The Frederick the Seven Years War and earlier
This older, wizened, plain Frederick is not the Frederick who fought in the War of Austrian Succession, or the Seven Years War. For that Frederick, we must turn to an earlier series of paintings. This Frederick is younger, his uniform is more ostentatious, he wears the orange sash of the Order of the Black Eagle, in addition to the star of that order. The orange color symbolizes the familial connection between Frederick's grandfather (King Frederick I of Prussia) and the leader of Protestant Europe: William of Orange. Frederick's hat in these images is not unlaced, it is decked with fine silvered lace which complements the white hat feathers that continue into his later reign.

Antoine Pense, (pre-1740) The Royal Brood: Frederick the Great and his brothers

Antoine Pense, Frederick the Great as King (1740-1745)

Antoine Pense, Frederick the Great as Commanding General, (1745)

Antoine Pense, Painting of Frederick II, Neues Palais 

Antione Pense, Frederick about 1750 

Fischer, portrait of Frederick the Great drawn during the Seven Years War (1758)

Frederick II of Prussia, by David Morier circa 1763

Somewhat frustratingly for wargamers, this Frederick, the orange sashed, hat laced, silver brandenbourged, Frederick, is the man who entered the Seven Years War. We can discern this from the fact that 1) all of the portraits from the early portion of Frederick's reign display him like this, and 2) that the only portrait of Frederick which comes specifically from the years of the Seven Years War (the second to last image above), shows Frederick in this uniform.

What does this mean for Wargamers and Reenactors? 

As you set out to portray Frederick in the setting of living history or wargaming , and you wish your portrayal to be accurate, it is vital to tailor your depiction of the king to the year/era you seek to portray. If you wish to portray Frederick in the later portions of his reign, many wargaming figures will work, as most manufacturers portray Frederick in this portion of his reign in undress uniform, no sash, and with an unlaced hat. This is perfect for Frederick during the 1770s and 1780s maneuvers, the War of Bavarian Succession, and perhaps even the last year of the Seven Years War.

"Old Fritz" in 15mm from Old Glory 15s

If you wish you portray Frederick during most of the Seven Years War, as well as the War of Austrian Succession, painting the King in a dress uniform, with the sash of the order of the Black Eagle, and silvered lace on his cocked hat is perhaps more appropriate for this period.

A 15mm Prussian officer miniature from Essex, promoted to Young Frederick

Reenactors who portray such as the excellent Rolf Zahren, seem to focus on the last years of his reign. Zahren perfectly captured the essence of "Old Frederick" and he will be missed.

Rolf Zahren, dearly departed reenactor

Likewise, the Berlin tour guide Dr. Olaf Kappelt, who I had the great good fortune to meet by chance in 2004, portrays an older Frederick: perhaps from the late 1760s or 1770s. When a fourteen-year-old me addressed Dr. Kappelt as "Great Frederick", he gently reminded me, "Berliners say Old Frederick." For good or ill, the image of "der Alte Fritz" has triumphed in historical imagery and memory.

Dr. Olaf Kappelt as Frederick

I am unaware of anyone who has an impression of younger Frederick from the War of Austrian Succession or the Seven Years War. Perhaps some of my dedicated readers can point one out?

If you enjoyed this post, or any of our other posts, please consider liking us on facebook, or following us on twitter. Consider checking out our exclusive content on Patreon. Finally, we are dedicated to keeping Kabinettskriege ad-free. In order to assist with this, please consider supporting us via the donate button in the upper right-hand corner of the page. As always:

Thanks for Reading, 

Alex Burns

Historian Spotlight: Nick Kane

Nick with his Masters Hood

Today, we are going to begin the first of a series of interviews with a number of historians, in various stages of their careers. By the time this series concludes in late April, we will have heard from Nick Kane, Ben Bartgis and Robbie MacNiven. All of these individuals are broadly interested in the Kabinettskriege era, and have been selected as a result of recent promotion, career success, entry into graduate school, new scholarly projects, or work recently begun in graduate school or at a historic site. Today's public historian is Nick Kane, a historian who researches the British Army in the era of the War of  Independence. Nick recently completed his Masters in Public History from the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. 

Alexander Burns : What drew you to study the history in this era? In 2018, much of popular memory of military history in the United States is focused on World War 1, World War 2, and the Vietnam War. What about the history of the 1648-1789 era do you find so compelling?

Nick Kane: It might be because it’s where the world as we know it began. Meaning warfare, culture, geo-political entities, and economies. I think the fact that I do re-enacting/living history for the eighteenth century is also a factor. I will say that years ago when I was a kid, I loved reading WWI and WWII history stuff. Some parts of it still interest me with that era, mostly entertainment products (movies/games) but not too much on the military history part. Unless it’s New Military History or something akin to it. I’m drawn to the social parts of military history, not so much the leaders and tactics. But if I have to talk about the actual military part of it, there’s a lot of subjects that the public does not know and it opens the door for historic dialogue. Things that Matthew Spring talks about in his book With Zeal and Bayonets Only. Once I discovered Sylvia Frey and Stephen Brumwell, I knew I wanted to study military history in the “New” school, which ironically isn’t so new anymore. There’s more to this era of study than linear warfare and powdered wigs. One of my projects in the future is to do another social history of the British army.

 AB: Is there a particular person, conflict, event, or geographical setting which draws you to this era?

NK: Mostly the Seven Years War and the American War for Independence for conflicts but I have been looking at the conflicts tied to those as well recently. Such as the Anglo-Cherokee war and the Siege of Gibraltar. Concerning people, I love to find those journals from enlisted soldiers and junior officers. While it only gives a limited view into their minds it does display some of the perspectives and thoughts they had. With the AWI I mostly look at the Southern Campaign since some of the battles happened near me, such as the Battle of Charlotte (5 minutes from me), Battle of Waxhaws, Kings Mountain, and Huck’s Defeat. It’s really cool to be in the literal area of one’s study. While I was up at Fort Ticonderoga, I gained a bigger appreciation for the Northern battles of the AWI and the French & Indian War. The South really did not have much in the way of F&I battles. The Anglo-Cherokee war did happen down here though, which brought down some of the British army this way. The other aspect of my studies deals with Scots in the British world. Particularly the Highland regiments, immigrants, and the music of that era.

AB: How do you plan to continue your research into this era? You have been employed in a public history setting, and are currently applying to graduate programs. Why have you chosen your particular path?

NK: The research part is gonna have to be done the old fashion way of either getting copies or going straight to the archive. However, I am fortunate to live in this era of technology where the exchange of information and text can be done so much more conveniently. In addition, many of my colleagues are willing to share some primary sources they have acquired. I chose the public history pathway for a variety of reasons. To me it is the best way to get the information to a larger number of people than academics. I also enjoy the public interaction and talking history with other interested people. Working at Fort Ticonderoga this past season really boosted my passion for the public interaction part. I learned a lot on how the public views history and how they can engage with it working there. I finished my Master’s last May and at this point I’m holding off on PhD studies. Maybe in the future I’ll continue it. I wouldn’t mind being that doctoral student that is middle-aged, experienced, and knows how to tackle things better. I do hope to get something published in the future though, just need to get cracking on that.

AB: What challenges have you faced in the historical profession? What, if any, advice would you give to high school and college students considering this field?

NK: It’s a small field of study and profession in comparison to others like STEM. Without sounding bitter, if you are going to enter the field then I urge you to have a passion for it. I don’t mean “I read David McCullough and watched Band of Brothers forty million times” but “I don’t have enough primary sources, help me archive.org!” level. For those thinking about graduate school I recommend making friends with other historians in the field you are interested in. The internet is a wonderful place to make history friends and some might even share stuff with you. The public history field is also wonderful but be prepared to relocate for a career in it. Lastly, if you are wanting to be an academic in history, start learning how to get rid of passive voice in your writing - your professors will love you very much.

AB: What have you been reading, recently? Could you recommend one book on your topic of interest, or any recent work on the era?

NK: I am going to admit here that I am one of those readers that has about five books on “reading” status at all times. I have Christopher Duffy’s The Military Experience in the Age of Reason, couple fantasy books, and pdfs I have opened up on my computer. I think the most recent book on my field that I can think of is Ilya Berkovich’s Motivation in War which you reviewed a few years ago. It’s a really fascinating read and helped me quite a bit on my thesis.

AB: Thanks so much Nick! We look forward to following your career as it continues!

NK: Thank you, Alex for this opportunity. I am watching to see how your doctoral studies go and what Kabinettskriege will produce next!

Outlander, The Battle of Alamance, and Eighteenth-Century Warfare

It gets worse from here

Dear Reader,

First of all, the point of this post is not the provided a detailed description of the way that the show Outlander deviated from the actual history of the Regulator Rebellion, and the major conflict of that rebellion at Alamance. Rather, I hope to evaluate Outlander's first major battle scene, depicted from start to finish, (there was a mist hiding what happened at Prestonpans, and we only really saw Culloden in hazy flashbacks that focused on two combatants.) At the outset, I must say that I was rather shocked by the historical inaccuracies, even on a basic level that is separated from disconnected from the complexities of uniformology.

This post is a mix of actual historical criticism and tongue-in-cheek humor. Take it for what it is, I am trying to stay sane.

At the outset, I am not a specialist in this particular part of colonial history, although I highly recommend Marjoleine Kars' Breaking Loose Together, and Aaron J. Palmer's  A Rule of Law, if you are looking for a basic information regarding the regulator movement and opposition to it. Furthermore, I highly recommend talking with Jeremiah DeGennaro and Drew Neill, who work at the Alamance Battlefield State Historic Site, and  Scott Douglas, the director of Fort Dobbs State Historic Site, for more detailed information regarding the material culture of the Regulator Rebellion. Check out the social media of the Alamance Battle Site for more great and detailed information that you will find here.

So, without further adieu: my thoughts. Like I did with the George Washington miniseries, I'll give the timestamp for the events I'm describing. However, I'll give them at the end of the paragraph or sentence, so as not the interrupt the flow.  These come from the 7th episode of the 5th season of Outlander.

Obviously there were not uniformed regulars at this battle (no "redcoats"). I think Tryon actually had three cannon, but who is counting. Cannon are expensive.  For uniformed regular troops from the 1770s, these costumes really aren't horrible. [37:58] You all know that I am a fool for well-fitted gaiters, and these are mediocre.  Either Tryon has a very small number of regular dragoons, or he has an officer's suite comparable to that of a Prussian Field Marshall.  [38:07]

Your Formation... that's deep, bro

No-one has bayonets fixed. We'll come back to this point later. Also, this is a very odd formation that the troops find themselves posted in. 6 ranks deep, in an order that is too far apart to be open order, but too close together to be a true extended order.

Stack those cannonballs

Next, let us turn to the artillery. Eighteenth-century field artillery did not store their ammunition in little pyramids right next to the cannon.[38:46] Moving the cannons any length of distance would require picking up and re-stacking the solid shot. I am also a little confused why only one cannon has a caisson. Likewise the Royal Artillerymen (the part of the British Army who work the cannons,) actually wore blue uniforms during this period.

Shut the Pan, bro

The infantry engage in an odd fire and advance by ranks. I think that the director might have played a bit of "Napoleon Total War" before filming this sequence. Speaking of infantry fire: Jamie is aiming his rifle with the pan open. [39:05] Can't even get a flash in the pan with those mad skillz. In the next shot, the pan is mercifully shut. [39:19] It is all good buddy, rookie mistake. Now, I understand (again, from reading secondary works) that the militia did use fairly conventional tactics when engaging the regulators, but that really isn't what is being displayed here.

Governor Tryon as the Original G

Let's talk pistols. First of all,  I am taken aback at the number of pistols on the screen. [38:39] Also, Governor Tryon no-scopes a guy with a pistol at like 80 yards. [38:54] Although when it comes to smoothbore long-arms, I am of the opinion that ranges are a bit greater than generally stated, the Prussian officer Berenhorst wrote in the late-eighteenth century: "At a range of more than fifty paces, a pistol shot and a well-thrown stone have just about the same effect."[1]

After two or three volleys, the militia charges into hand to hand combat. Among the troops with military style muskets, narry a bayonet is seen. Historically, the fighting took place at range until the regulators ran low on ammunition, and that doesn't seem to be what is happening here.  In this charge sequence, a guy with a stick kills a regular soldier. This is what happens when you don't fix your bayonets.  During this same sequence, the militia appears out of the undergrowth, killing redcoat troops in an ambush. These are the stock images from which American identity is made.

Hereafter follows a relatively long and not horrible seen of two groups of militia fighting in a woodland environment. In the actual battle, it seems that the militia stayed in the open until the regulators ran low on ammunition.[2] As opposed to reloading their long-arms, most of the militia seems to be content firing a seemingly infinite number of pistols. A British soldier finally uses a bayonet, although he is holding it in his hand, and it fighting with it like a dagger. [42:01]

"Ahh! Both Grunt" Indeed

 Eventually, after some hand-to-hand fighting sequences with the lead actors, a pursuit montage depicts flying civilians with weapons being shot down by uniformed redcoats. See above point regarding American identity. Also, a montage of redcoats bludgeoning prisoners, and prisoners being dragged behind redcoats on horseback. One has to ask the question, did the dragoon dismount and tie these prisoners to his saddle mid-battle, or did he have some of his colleagues in the infantry helpful round up a few regulators for a drag?

Obviously, I am not trying to excuse British imperialism, or the rough way that the regulators were treated in the aftermath of the battle. One man, James Few, was hung after twice refusing a pardon from Governor Tryon, and there were more executions as well.[3] I do think, however, that choosing to make uniformed British regulars carry out these atrocities takes away some of the ambiguity that have a non-uniformed militia carrying out these acts might have.

All in all, it is important for those consuming Outlander as an enjoyable fiction to keep in mind that the show relies on stock images of eighteenth-century warfare that have actually decreased in quality over time. Season 3's Battle of Culloden montage was more true to actual events (even if it was still a bit shady) than this season's portrayal of the Battle of Alamance. So, ask yourself, why do you watch Outlander? If you are looking for Jacobites to get you hot and bothered,  I highly recommend the 1995 Kidnapped's Armand Assante.

He's bringing sexy back

If you enjoyed this post, or any of our other posts, please consider liking us on facebook, or following us on twitter. Consider checking out our exclusive content on Patreon. Finally, we are dedicated to keeping Kabinettskriege ad-free. In order to assist with this, please consider supporting us via the donate button in the upper right-hand corner of the page. As always:

Thanks for Reading, 

Alex Burns

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Berenhorst, Betrachtungen, Vol II, 434. (Quoted in Duffy, Military Experience in the Age of Reason, 223)
[2] Marjoleine Kars, Breaking Loose Together, 200.
[3]Ibid, 201.