"British Foot Guards wore grey pantaloons at Waterloo" Topic

Having posted several comments on another thread concerning the painting of British Guards figures within the Napoleonic Gallery section, I was asked to create a new thread about the colour of the trousers (pantaloons) worn by all four battalions of British Foot Guards at Waterloo. The Coldstream and 3rd Foot Guards wore grey pantaloons during the fighting, not white summer trousers (or white undress trousers) as incorrectly stated or indictaed in a number of publications. Here is a link to a discussion of the topic within the Project Hougoumont Facebook group, to which I contributed: link

Many thanks

John

And here is the original TMP thread to which I referred: TMP link

John, thanks for the confirmation that I painted mine in the colours of the day. I did consider using white since I liked the look on 28mm miniatures better, but in the end went with grey to be more historically correct.

@Condotta

It's my pleasure.

The key to this is/are the extant 'Holland' Order Books, which neither Donald Fosten or Philip Haythornthwaite were aware. These fascinating books contain a wealth of information.

The material losses (as opposed to men) the Coldstream and 3rd Foot Guards Light Companies sustained at Bergen-op-Zoom had an effect on other items. One direct result was that both battalions were predominately supplied with the new Light Infantry Pattern Musket. I don't just mean the Light Companies, but the whole battalions.

The buglers in the two Light Companies of the Coldstream and 3rd Foot Guards were also using the new 'keyed' bugle. They had been captured at Bergen-op-Zoom and all their items taken by the French. Unfortnately, Bugler George Hinckley of the Coldstream also had the misfortune to be captured at Waterloo during the defence of Hougoumont. This was during the infamous episode at the North Gate, commonly referred to as the 'Closing of the Gates'.

Thanks again for taking the trouble to post this separately. I found your earlier expalanation as to how this tale arose quite fascinating and feared it might pass unnoticed. Even more glad you pointed me to the Facebook thing for Project Hougoumont. For those of you who, like me "reach for their pistol when they hear the word Facebook", this is a wonderful resource of images relating to Waterloo, even ACW at times!. I spent hours last night going through every picture.

Amazed to see that the later extension has been demolished by the South Gate……if you can do that, any chance you could move that earth mound back to the ridge line too? Where will the memorial plaque go BTW?

@deadhead

Thanks for your feedback on the Project Hougoumont Facebook page. Social media is something we all should be aware of as both a good and bad thing. It is dependant on the type of people who interact, and in the main I find that those on the Facebook pages I use are genuine people.

The Coldstream Guards plaque is currently being relocated, as it was situated on the exterior wall of the extension you mention. Indeed, I was contacted by RHQ Coldstream Guards only last week for some information on the various other placques mounted at the North Gate, which is where they would like their's to be located.

I am not sure where the new placque to the British troops will be located at Hougoumont, nor details of the final design, although I know some of the ideas that have been discussed. In truth, I have attempted to stay out of the politics which all of these discussions create. What is encouraging is that restoration work at Hougoumont has begun, and the farm complex will be in a much healthier state come June 2015.

Thank you very much. I'm sure a lot of us will be glad of this as we paint up troops for the Bicentenary.

I've found another little known image from among those concerning the British Foot Guards at Waterloo. This is a sketch by George Jones which shows the Guards in 'Marching Order': link

I believe that this shows two privates from the 2nd Battalion 1st Foot Guards. Almost all of the most famous contemporary images of the 1st Foot Guards at Waterloo show members of the 3rd Battalion. Hence, this is rare.

Glad to see the Trotter back pack in use in this picture………….(only joking…….honestly!.)

Though the QM order books are interesting I still prefer the evidence that, at Quatre Bras, the 30th Foot were confused for a guards battalion because they were wearing white trousers. It seems an odd mistake to make if the Guards HADN'T become a familiar sight in white trews in the preceding months.
Thus this first hand account from Captain Rudyard of the RA seems to me to be more convincing! I'll take the words of a man on the battlefield over orderbooks and tailors' receipts every time!

But perhaps more importantly, I like how they look and I'm not going to start repainting my Coldstreams and 3rds!

@Lord Hill

You'll be pleased to know that I was eagerly awaiting your comments.

I must agree that if we set aside historical research, the appearance of the Foot Guards in white trousers is indeed most pleasing, and it was not my intention to belittle anyone who has painted their figures in this manner and prefers them this way. I hope you will forgive me if I gave you this impression.

With regards to the first-hand account by Samuel Rudyerd, I take it you are refering to one of his two letters written to William Siborne in 1835 and 1838. Could you let me know which of these you are referencing?

I agree with you, in so much as a contemporary account written in the (immediate) aftermath of events carries considerable weight. However, I cannot reconcile this with the information in the extant Holland Order Books and the Quartermaster's own journal. Of course, I'd be delighted to learn of anything new that you are able to contribute.

King regards

John

If Rudyard was writing in the 1830s, then it is possible he may have confused the appearance of the 2nd and 3rd Guards at the battles, and then later in Paris.

However, where does this leave the famous painting by Denis Dighton of the 2nd Guards' light company skirmishing with the French outside the South Gate, as I thought this was contemporary, as with much of Dighton's work? Are you suggesting that he used models wearing the white duck trousers issued later in Paris? Given his usual level of attention to detail it seems odd he would not have checked what the men were actually wearing on the day.

link

The good Mr JF did cover this in the earlier thread. As you say, "fairly contemporary". Poor Mr D was not sitting with an easel and his brushes a few yards south of Hougoumont that Sunday when he painted this. Look at the French rig in pre Bardin uniforms and, hang on, how are the Guards emerging onto the French right flank into a clearing…from a wood? Our lads lined a wall and faced south across a clearing and blew them away….or charged south across an orchard to clear the east flank. Mr D did the best he could, based on what he saw the guards wearing well after the battle. I cannot accept any painting as evidence of anything. Diaries maybe, memoires (decades after) hmmmm, contemporary records, receipts, accounts that is what (almost) convinces me

@Supercilius Maximus,

As deadhead stated in his post, I tried to qualify the role Dighton played by painting the episode at Hougoumont in my initial post. Here is the extract:

'Each and every entry in the said Holland Order Books makes reference to grey pantaloons, even instructing the officers to assimulate with the men (so as not to be identified easily by the enemy as an officer and shot), by wearing grey pantaloons. It is clear that ALL four battalions of Foot Guards wore grey pantaloons during the campaign. Now what is interesting is what followed. The Allies were victorious and occupied Paris on the 7th July, with most of the British troops moving into the Bois de Bolougne. On the 30th July the two battalions were enhanced by a considerable draft of men from England (replacing all those who had been killed and wounded at Waterloo), and new clothing was issued to the troops from this date. Unsurprisingly, the two flank companies were the first to receive the new items, which included "white summer trousers". Denis Dighton would no doubt have seen the troops in Paris after this time, and like most contemporary artists, he merely painted what he saw. The 2nd Battalion 3rd Foot Guards did not form part of the army of occupation (although the Coldstream did), and they returned to England at the end of December 1815.'

It is my belief that Dighton, who was in Paris during the occupation, saw the Coldstream and painted them in accordance with their appearance at that time.

As deadhead also states, the action depicted is not entirely accurate, as the Coldstream Light Company was stationed at the end of the lane to the west of Hougoumont, beyond the kitchen garden, adjacent to the north gate, and it was only the front left sub-division (under Lt-Col Henry Wyndham and the Hon Robert Moore) along with the front right sub-division of the 3rd Foot Guards Light Company, which advanced. However, none of this detracts from the quality of Dighton's work, which captures the 'essence' of the fighting superbly.

All I can say is that John Franklin should start writing some books about Waterloo, if he thinks he knows so much about it. Oh, hang on…on my bookshelf I find Hanoverian Correspondence, Netherlands Correspondence…….etc etc.

Seriously. This is one of the best researched threads I have come across, in ages. I always wondered why we saw so many pictures of the Guards, so differently turned out from the line. 200 years on, scientific historical research can still turn up something that seems to put a controversy to rest, at last. Not many chances left I suspect……..

Now, did French Guard Artillery wear a bearskin peak still, in 1815? Did some Chassseurs of the Guard wear a cut away habit rather than the dolman, in 1815? Did the Carabiniers wear that pale blue rig, in 1815? Did any British carry a pale blue water bottle, or was that a Crimean War thing? Did anything happen of any importance before June 1815???

@deadhead

Many thanks for your kind words. I think the truth is there are many issues relating to Waterloo that need to be looked at more closely and addressed. A number of individuals are doing excellent work, and much more information has been made available on the various contingents, such as the Brunswick and Dutch and Belgians, recently.

The fighting at Hougoumont has, in the main, been described through the words of the Allied combattants, but the most fascinating elements tend to come to light when we look more closely at the French – who not surprisingly wrote less about this campaign than other, more glorious ones. It is fitting therefore to see that the questions you ask relate mainly to the French.

True…………..but they are silly questions frankly. Did you wear this or that? How did you cover your Louis XVIII emblems etc? Bound to be about French rig, as a period of "transition".

Yet, I guess, Netherlands were going through same thing and as for the poor raggedy Prussians….

I did enjoy Andrew Field's book on the French Perspective, even if critically bashed…but I think it is far more important to see what you and Glover have done to cover the Allied side (and I do mean not just the "English"). I do have everything you have both published on correspondence and think them wonderful.

1815, 200 years on, may be our last chance to catch up on what is still there for researchers. My two lads are studying undergraduate history, which was always my dream. I was caught by the dark side and did Medicine instead and then surgery. OK, pays for the library on 1815 (not much missing), but I do love working with them through their projects now.

What is the next project?

@deadhead

I personally have published very little on Waterloo prior to today, only a couple of books on the Hanoverian and Netherlands troops. There'll be a few more items before the bicentenary, but I'm under contract and cannot say anything on that score until next year.

I know Gareth Glover has one more book of letters and reports on the British in his series to publish, as he told me. But as he also asked me to help him with specific information on the French and Prussian troops, he will no doubt have other publications available.

I enjoyed Andrew Field's book and was not aware that it was critically bashed. I think that he did a very credible job based upon the information at his disposal. I'm sure that there'll be some excellent work published between now and 2015, and that avid enthusiasts of Waterloo will have plenty to enjoy (and discuss).

He means, by very little, a couple of books on the Hanoverians, plus a book on the Netherlands troops….too modest and punctuation is everything! I do look forward to future publications and, to those who produce such things, try looking at the illustrations in his books. If you cannot spot a potential there for a 28mm figure I'd be surprised!

Thanks very much for your comments. Whilst it is sad that the two junior regiments cannot accurately appear in white pants on our tabletops any more, I agree that it is much more important that research has won out over legend.

@deadhead

You are overoptimistic that at least diligent research will beat legend – usually those works are not read.
Look at the entrenched lies of Napoleon about this battle – like he did spot the Prussian already at 13:00 – dispite best effort of serious research – a lot of people still and will forever believe this.