"British General's Uniform at Waterloo" Topic

Greetings.

I am looking for information about the uniform of generals in the British contingent at Waterloo. There appear to be three patterns that I can find online:

Option 1: Two epaulettes, some extra gold on the wrists, but otherwise very similar to a Colonel. MG Sir Lambert is showing in such a uniform on Wikipedia.

Option 2: No left epaulette, right epaulette flowing into aiguilettes of various types. This unnamed general from the 1815 campaign is an example.

Option 3: Broad blue facing (?) along jacket with gold braid. Usually shown with single epaulette/aiguillette but I have seen some with two epaulettes as well. MG Sir Ponsonby is shown in this style.

I am assuming one of those is dress uniform but I can't figure the specifics here. From this arise a few questions:

A. Which of the above three options would be worn by a typical Major General at Waterloo (excluding the more exotic cavalry folks)?

B. Whatever the style, is there any distinction in uniform between Major Generals and Lieutenant Generals (visible at 28mm…)? Picton has a unique model so this is really just relevant to Hill and Clinton.

C. I saw some photos of the first uniform option associated with Brigadiers during the Peninsula Campaign. Except there don't appear to be any Brigadiers at Waterloo. Colonels (or below) command the battalions and then brigade command goes straight to Major Generals. Did that title get phased out temporarily at Waterloo or is this one of those weird British things where the Brigadier title refers to the role rather than a rank (i.e. would Major General Kempt be a "Brigadier" by virtue of commanding the 8th British Brigade)?

Note that all of the above is in the context of 28mm figures so I am not looking for hyper-precision. Just trying to understand which models I should use for the "right" command bases at Waterloo. Thanks

A Major General would have the gold tunic loops/buttons spaced in pairs, with two sets of two (spaced) chevrons running from the cuff to the forearm with the points facing down with button at the said point. And two sets of two buttons on the back pockets.

A lieutenant-General would have the same but in threes rather than twos.

But none of that would really matter in detail. Just paint 'General' figures with dark blue facings with lots of gold braiding. Same goes for Brigadiers. But then, The Duke wore a riding coat and Picton was attired in civilian dress due to the unavailability of his luggage. What the other Generals and officers wore isn't really known. That they were rushed to their duties does not necessarily mean that they fought in their evening dress (Those officers not invited to the famous ball would be in their correct attire), though it was reported that some did.

A Brigadier was a step up from a Colonel and commanded a Brigade which was a Field Officer rank' (Kempt being a Brigade commander in Picton's 8th Division). He too would wear a General's uniform as above but with a single button loop etc.

Thanks dibble. Much appreciated. I understand the number button spacing but, as you said, that won't show up at scale. My main concern are the two epaulettes versus single epaulette with aiguillette configuration. *That* does show up in 28mm scale. Any guidance on that aspect?

Option 1 of your list is post-Waterloo.

Here's Picton in the correct style of uniform

The Lapel could be buttoned over as shown in the Picton picture. Or buttoned over to show the dark blue facing as it is the picture below of William Stuart in the uniform of a Major General.

PS. Sorry about the editing and erratic posting.

Gus Fring

Just like the AWI, everyone wore the "proper" uniform when posing for a portrait. Not what they wore on campaign. "That's not proper soldierly, dontcha know!"

Do you think I don't know?

Posters usually read, or rather should read, all the posts in a thread "dontcha know!"

dibble, could you perhaps enlighten my ignorance? I was under the impression that Majors and Lieutenant Colonels were Field Officers, while Colonels and above were of Staff rank. Is that a false distinction or did it perhaps apply to a later period?

Thanks dibble. All clear now. Time to sculpt a lot of aiguillettes…

42flanker

dibble, could you perhaps enlighten my ignorance? I was under the impression that Majors and Lieutenant Colonels were Field Officers, while Colonels and above were of Staff rank. Is that a false distinction or did it perhaps apply to a later period?

A colonel is indeed a Staff rank as is that of a Brigadier general. But there were Brigadiers 'field' who's rank was
the equivalent. But it's just one of those quirks of the system.