Help support TMP

"Napoleon's Imperial Guard: Infantry, Dawson" Topic

4 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the Blogs of War Message Board

Back to the Napoleonic Media Message Board

Areas of Interest


Featured Hobby News Article

Featured Showcase Article

The QuarterMaster Table Top

Need 16 square feet of gaming space, built to order?

729 hits since 7 Aug 2019
©1994-2019 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Sebastian Palmer07 Aug 2019 11:56 p.m. PST


I'm still reading this at present, but have nonetheless written a brief review of it, here:


… and an even briefer one for Amazon UK. Hope it might be of interest? Comments as ever welcomed here or at my blog.

Personal logo Artilleryman Supporting Member of TMP08 Aug 2019 12:34 a.m. PST

Thanks for this review; very helpful. I must agree with your comments on Mr Dawson's work. It is absolutely fascinating and frustrating in equal measure. I have a number of the author's books and have not regretted any purchase. However, while always impressed by the detail of the research involved, the editing has sometimes been a let down and Mr Dawson's conclusions from the evidence he has presented has sometimes been surprising. Either way, this review has swung my vote and the book will be finding its way onto my shelves.

von Winterfeldt09 Aug 2019 3:37 a.m. PST

again a very helpfull review, despite the French army of 1815 is more on the low interest side for me, this seems to be a must read

SHaT198414 Aug 2019 7:32 p.m. PST

Ok I bit.
Always strange, yet another cover, of an elite formation but the illustration is of the lowliest Voltigeurs that could at first glance be taken for line.

Guys- wondering what the reference to 1815 is about, and the "conclusions from the evidence he has presented has sometimes been surprising"- being what conclusions are being made??

OK maybe I see what you mean. I looked at the pics from the book Seb- and did see the royal 'we' being used when summing up Sapeurs and drummers uniforms- why use a French term in context (preferable) and the English word for next? Just the example of 'sub-officers' puts me off.

Whatever unit pp316-17 are referring to, to say that some uniform aspect is undocumented seems bizarre. And the Chasseur officer, whom I also photographed (at Musee de l'Emperi I assume though O thought he was originally at Paris), failing to note that the pantaloons are a display refrabrication. Clearly they are not the expensive moleskin tight fitting breeches his text talks about.

The tables- yes I can see exactly where the data came from. As my handle implies, the Service Historique de 'lArmee de Terre (SHAT was stamped on every document) where I also researched the fateful year of 1805; and the table headings are exact translations of the 'Returns du Regiment x' etc.

I guess the 'exposure' of such material, even where conclusions (god help us when a wargamer starts citing them) is an advance over the 'old days'.

Still I'd love to get back to Paris one day- I'm sure the French have tried to forget the Rainbow Warrior incident by now and would let me back in at Vincennes ;-/ .

Regards, d

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.