"Is the Idea " what makes it attractive." Topic

OK now let me ask the question from the other way around. Is it the "idea" of "reasonableness" or more particularly "restraint" or gentlemanly conduct in war what attracts us to the 18th century. It does not matter if this is a pure illusion, distortion of the truth, or actually true. Regardless of what it actually is, is it the idea, conception, myth or hope that makes it so interesting?

By the way each era would then have it's myth, or idealized ideal and be far from the real truth.

The idea of wearing powdered wigs and beauty spots, while preparing an assault in the trenches does have some appeal.
"Albert, where is my scent?"

I have always been intrigued by the elaborate ceremonies and courtesies accompanying a surrender. Whether you were allowed to march out with your colours flying, or cased. Whose music the surrendering band could play. And then inviting the defeated to dinner. That kind of thing.

It is almost as if the 18th century offers us the opportunity to role-play a bit. I remember many the game that ended with, "we beat the parley and will quit the field in return for no pursuit from you till dawn and both sides may collect their wounded." Or some such instead of the dreaded, "Well, I figure what happens next is….". Such a more satisfying way to end thing.

Gentlemanly behavior isn't limited to the Lace Wars. In 1812 the officers from Fort Niagara were having dinner with the officers of Fort George when news came of the American declaration of war. Seeing no sense in quitting a fine meal, they finished their meal, shook hands and next day began blasted away at each other across the river.

Isn't it the limitation of the weaponry and the proffessionalism of the armies which produces a pleasing chess board like aspect to the battlefields ?

Troops march and counter march until they finally get to within 100yards of each other then blast away into a dense fog of powder smoke.

Plus, it's the height of the era of the colourful uniform which is jolly pretty.

It looks nice on the table,The colors and hats are cool. I just can't stand the tactics of the era all the way to the ACW. I always ask myself why are these fools standing up and moving in the open. even just adding a line of 2.5 foot tall steel Pavise to kneel and fire behind would have been such a better idea. ( No small arm that used black powder can punch through 1/4 inch hardened steel plate.) Just read up Ned Kelly's armor :)

I agree about the hats. From the 1920's through the 1950's, it seemed everyone was wearing a fedora: very cool. The tricorn held sway for more than a hundred years. I wonder if baseball had existed would 18th century teams would have worn them…

"Gentlemen of the French Guards, fire first."

No, just the tricorns make it atractive

How much do the niceties of custom depend on who the opposing force is?

Several factors. In no particular order:

Simplicity: with professional armies and lights troops absent from major pitched battles, Charles Grant was able to re-fight Mollwitz and Fontenoy using only 3 troops types, infantry, cavalry and artillery. And thus simple rules, which does not imply simplistic tactics / games: the rules of chess are short and simple, those of checkers even more -and Poe argued that checkers are even more challenging than chess, since your opponent is not bewildered by the myriad of possible combinations of pieces with different characteristics.

Esthetics: of the uniforms, at a peak of elegance between the baggy 'bathrobe' coat of the WSS and the skimpy uniforms of the late 18th C. And tricornes look better than the silly military hats of the Napoleonic era: flowerpot, frying pan, stovepipe…
Of the gaming table: the armies look not only eye-candy but also 'neat'; so neat that it's almost unreal for a bloodbath, it's like playing with toy soldiers. And I like to play with toy soldiers.

Ethics: the elegant, knightly behavior during Lace Wars battles (as we like to perceive them), the 'sportsmanship' of the time, so different from 'modern' warfare, seem almost misplaced, unrealistic, as if the battles were ballets or carrousels rather than episodes of mass murder. Thus one can almost imagine to be simulating grand maneuvers rather than a form of organized massacre.

( link )

quite simply for me, the 18th Century is the most comfortable period to game in.

My view of war has become somewhat notorious on TMP and the idea of waging war in a restrained manner is highly appealing. Even Frederick the Great said that war should be waged so that the productive citizen and peasant should not even know it is going on. Like Jean Louis I detest wars where nationalism plays a factor and the other side Is viewed as something sub-human only worthy of being exterminated, and I detest especially wars without worth. Being 66 and having grown up in America I a have had a snootful of wars without purpose where we send young men to fight and die without purpose in some foreign hell-hole for people who aren't worth the sacrifice. All we get is the bill and the body bags to prop up worthless dictators from Diem to Karzai at a sacrifice of our own national blood and treasure. I'm tired of people saying "we're fighting for oil" too. Here we are after tons of wars for oil and what I want to know is where's the oil? In contrast to this I see the wars of the 18th century as entirely rational in that they were fighting for this province, that colony, this trade route, that crown, that duchy and so forth. Religion and nationalism (a new religion) had nothing to do with it. and the only difference was where the taxes were mailed to. Plus, when you had the crown province, kingdom or concession you stopped fighting because you knew you won. You MIGHT trade these back for some other concession at the peace table, but that's fine. That's just good capitalistic bargaining, and if you get screwed there-- well- "caveat emptor."

For me the whole "ethos" of a reasonability and knightly values, or more properly "courtly" culture, a culture of courtesy and chivalry is very attractive. This whole "Gentlemen of France you may fire first" and the granting of liberal terms, of conventions against the brutality of war, and the demands of courtly and noble life which curtailed the wars (must get home to court before November so one can manage one's affairs and be there for the Christmas, new years and pre-Lenten festivities" are other brakes on the violence of war.

The clothing was a lot easier to wear than the Napoleonic Wars where-- sorry-- I feel everyone looks like a bunch of balloon sculptres or Jimmy-Dean Sasages, and being at an age where I am a bit overweight, it's nice to see portly generals who were military genius'. I know that every day I get up and look in the mirror I see my father's face, a face the result of 400 years of inbred central European militarism and realize My picture staring out of one of those portraits would not be out of place.

But of course for me it's the art, literature, music, culture and society of the 18th century that is almost a narcotic.

Thus for me in Imaginations, I advance this even further with long and lavish attention of supply lines, magazines and sieges,

As I say Battle at the pace of a contratanz, maneuver by minuet.

Well Otto,

A nice idea! War is a waste of life and those that cause it may they rot forever! Its nice to imagine that humans can be reasonable, the truth is probably far from the perceptions we so vividly create. I wish there was no war, no young men lost, wives, mothers, fathers crying over empty rooms. Its a nice idea that we can be civilised, that manifestations of evil are not pat of all war. Frederick the great hated the Saxons and was less than silent in his relentless pursuit of them and the Saxon peoples. The first instance of modern biological warfare was waged in the woods of North America, with small pox blankets! The actual atrocities are quite numerous and I shall not go on with them in the late and all the way through the 18th century. However the art and literature and music was very vibrant! We'll leave it at that :)

C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas la guerre
(It is magnificent, but it is not war)

Precisely…

So much the more as with toy soldiers we can forget

Dear Siege Works Studios

Somehow your words do not convince. But I see you have brought up the small-pox infested blankets. I notice you did NOT bring up the brutal tortures that the American Indians inflicted upon their captives such that make brutal serial killers today envious. You obviously do not consider chopping off a persons fingers and toes, solely cutting them to pieces, roasting them, eating them, tearing their heart out and eating them as an atrocity.

In the first place I see no record where any of the European powers did this to each other (not even Frederick to the Saxons, nor the Saxons in return) as a matter of policy, as the Indians did, and it matters not that they did it to other Indians as well, the victims were agonized just the same and the act was "atrocious" just the same, but of course you have your reasons for turning a blind eye to this. As for the blankets. Do you expect mercy from the people who had relatives and loved ones treated this way? Can you blame them? Was there ever an effort to stop this on the part of the Indians, Never.

yes, there were many small atrocities throughout all wars, but I also recall that the gauntlet lines and gallows were kept busy by commanders who severely punished such things, and-- they were SMALL atrocities, not general policy. Crimes. Not like the wars immediately preceeding and immediately following the 18th century which saw slaughter of the innocent on a massive scal for "La Gloire!"

Its all about the recorded glory glory and bravery bravery displayed in an area so much given to geometry and arrangement. The perfect platform to build wargames rules on. This period is the starting point of it all, to my understanding – military-history-wise speaking.
Speaking for myself, its more of a dental issue, to be honest. More precisely dental bravery. When I was a kid, my dentist was located right next to a miniatures dealers shop. It was a set of Prussian 7YW grenadiers in platoon fire, my Mom would award me after I had endured the dentists torture like a real grenadier. I was about 9 and my eyes were level with the shops counter where the dealer set up the figures in Line formation right in front of my eyes while briefing me to the glory of Fredericks Prussian army. Ever since then, I am hooked to it. Possibly less of reason here but more post traumatic whatever dental issues here at work.

Cheers.

Dear Otto,

I appreciate where you are coming from and I shall withdraw politely from any further discussions on the topic after this post. While I do enjoy a good discussion I do not wish to be offensive, something I am not sure will happen if I pursue and push the discussion.

Concering the noble savage, there is no such thing. They were quite savage and brutal – the Indians and it just goes to show that despite the age men both western and savage treated each other appallingly!

Again just off the top of my head, Tarleton on the British side and Harry Lee and Macdowell during the AWI.

Persecution of Loyalists which drove many into exile to Canada as a result of the AWI,

The Duke of Cumberland's execution of all wounded soldiers in the days following the Battle of Culloden.

Frederick the Great's burdensome treatment of the Saxons,(but to be fair the Prussians did act very well in Silesia),

The enforcement of Prisoners of war to fight and the enforced conscription of non Prussians by the various sub contractors for the Freikorps and even regular Prussian army on such a scale that 10 000,'s of men were forced to fight for Prussia or be executed if the refused or deserted after being forced into the army.

The Black hole of Calcutta a nasty thing by the Indian forces.

Nadir Shah of Persia sacking of Delhi (20 000 casualties from memory)

The Duke of Malborough literally laid Bavaria waste, systematically destroying some 400 villages in the Spanish War of Succession.

These are just the ones I can remember off the top of my head. To be fair in comparison to 1/3rd of Europe dead from plague, famine and war in the Thirty Years War or the atrocities during the French Revolution, Spain and Russia directly thereafter, the wars in the 18th century at least in Europe did not have quite the same level of insanity, but insanity was there all the same, when you start to dig beneath the surface. :) However colonial actions not withstanding, most of the wars in the 19th century went along without too many atrocities either, I think the only difference really is that in the 18th century they were dressed in pink and frilly lace :)

Well I have enjoyed the discussions and hope they have been received with the same warm enjoyment of a good debate as I have received everyone's comments. So I bid the enlightenment discussions adieu!

Dear Jean Lous

Tell me, do you think that the military costume of the 18th century was much closer, comparatively to the civilian dress of the period? I think a case can be made for it. especially with the decline of body army from the 17th to the 18th centuries. You make several excellent points with regard to simplicity, elegance and asesthetics in the military dress as opposed to earlier and later periods.

One of the things that I see is that the long coats and the closer fitting breeches combined to make a longer and softer line, and even on generals who were a bit overweight the coats were cut full and long and created a softer curve , dare I say almost a late Baroque and Rococo curve that smoothed the angles and hard edges.

When I study the costume I am always struck by the attention to the repetition of the curve which is much easier on the eye. At the same time the lacing and frogging of the coat and the whole costume was itself a bundle of sensuous curves. Nothing reinforces this more than the drawing you presented a few messages ago of the officers with the liveried footmen and the ladies, all seeming to be gathered together under a moderate breeze.

Secondly, even in the depiction of the dead, note the pose of the officers viewing the dead, who do not look like real dead, but are artfully posed, again as a compendium of curves. They are not gnarled up, contorted, and askew, like bloody dirty rags (which if you look at Brady's pictures of Antietam you clearly see) but they seemed to have died almost artistically. I'm sure that if they had last words they would have been worthy Of Plutarch. The victors who observe them are not triumphant or bragging, or crowing, but seem respectful, regretful, and consiliatory.

Granted this is all in art and in a romanticized ideal of the real war of the period, but it I a very nice ideal to have.

I believe that the caption most associated with the second painting is
"the blood of my enemy is also human blood"
I'm not exactly sure, but I think it was king Louis something-or-another (14?)
speaking to his son on war. If it isn't, then thats how I like to think of it.
wether historical or not, compared to preceding centuries and especially the one after, the 18th and 19th century european warfare is comparatively devoid of atrocities, as far as I know. I'm aware that they existed, but the amount of them seems to have been less. This apparent, stereotypical or not, honorable behavior (along with uniforms) is what has drawn me to the period. My gaming group plays a lot of WW2 and the like, and its hard to "revel in Glory" with certain happenings being an unescapable institution of the period, and its damned distasteful.
So, in my own little world, I like to think that the possibility exists that the commanders of the armies could ride forth and perhaps solve the issue over a glass of sherry, or a duel till first blood, or if it came down to a fight, all parties will be treated honorably… and since my 18th century endeavors are imaginations, who is to say it isn't so. at least the soldiers and officers of the army of the Grand Duchy of Stallindorf shall always comport themselves as gentlemen, I do say. A defeated foe shall keep their colors and arms and be allowed to march home with the full honors of war.

out of touch with reality, perhaps, overly romantic, probably, but whatever.
~Joe

@ Dobber: yes, 'The blood of the enemy too is human blood', Louis XV to his son on the battlefield of Fontenoy.

Do you have a blog devoted to your 18th C. endeavors?

Mr abdul666lw,
not as of yet, as they are just beginning
plan is to make one as soon as the army is assembled, whenever i get off my lazy butt and paint them
~Joe
PS: I just did a quick google search and there is a blog "the Grand Duchy of Stollen"
It appears I'm going to have to come up with a new name to avoid detracting from this fine gentleman.

the 18th century was full of real ImagiNations and was before nationalism, the purpose was not necessarily to destroy your adversary but to bring him to a favorable agreement.
From a gaming point of view it is very easy to mix and match figures from the various armies of the period.

Dear Dobber
A few suggestions from names I cooked up but haven't used.

The Kingdom of Sachertorte.

Calgon (the bath oil beads)

Salhepatica (an old medicine

Nikonzoom (stolen from Bored of the Rings.

Antideluvia (means before the flood)

Prozac

Paranomaisia =-- What this whole naming thing is all about- a play on words.

Formicacia- Swarming, like ants.

Galactaphagia (means milk drinker

Zelotypia (extreme Zenophobia

Xanthodonia (Xanthodont means "yellow teeth"

Framboesia A brand of cheese.

Telythptoria- That which corrupts women. (Don't ask me how, I just find em and copy em.)

Gulagia- (I use this for one of my own as a pseudo-Russian country, but you can use it too. The great thing about this is you can put the capital at…. wait for it… Gullagin's Island.

L'Ennui-- French for Boredom.

Marzipano- From Marzipan, a sweet almond flavored paste for cookies.

Sambucca- A liquor

Salmonella- Food Poisoning.

Zugzwang A term, usually from chess, where a player is forced to move, but both moves are bad. Could serve for the cliché "Damned if you do and damned if you don't" A situation very familiar to most gamers and husbands.

My own Imagi-Nations are Saxe Burlap und Schleswig Beerstein, Flounce, Bad Zu Wurst, Gulagia, Ikea (a lampoon of the Turks, and The Grand Duchy of the Grand Duke of Gorgonzola. In my modern set up, the powers are (see if you can guess who they represent ) Fahrvergnuggen, The Workers Winter Wonderland of Freeland, The 443rd (and counting) Flounce Republic. Fanabla, The Newnited State, Hungland and the Brutish Empire, Terra Masu, Tropicana, and Bandrika.

And when you get finished with the country you get to make up all those wonderful names for the monarch and court and charactes. Admiral Battenhatch, Marshal Claude Du Pieces, The Prince of Saxe-Hillbilliehausen, The Prince of Zweibak, etc.

If you want, send me your postal address on Sigurd@eclipse.net. I am the editor and publisher of "Saxe N' Violets" which is a quarterly newsletter devoted to Imagi-Nations published by the Society of Daisy, a group dedicated to the use and development of Imagi-nations, who also puts on "The Weekend" Convention in Lancaster in June. Two of the Issues had long articles with over a hundred possible names. I'll send you the issue for free.

Ze

Mine are the Dalriadic Confederacy and Mirlitonia.

It is the age of kings, before mankind tried to prove he could govern himself without divine right. It all went down hill after that.

Dear Pyrate Captain.

Sad to say but sometimes that's the way it seems to be.

I belive I sent the email to the correct address. thanks again OSchmidt

Dear Dobber

Got it.