Help support TMP


"Lobster pots" Topic


10 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.

Please do not use bad language on the forums.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Blogs of War Message Board

Back to the English Civil War Message Board


Areas of Interest

General
Renaissance

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Showcase Article

Battle-Market: Tannenberg 1410

The Editor tries out a boardgame - yes, a boardgame - from battle-market magazine.


Featured Profile Article

Visiting Reaper - 2000!

The Editor takes a virtual tour of Reaper's new offices.


Current Poll


Featured Book Review


831 hits since 8 Jan 2023
©1994-2023 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

KeepYourPowderDry08 Jan 2023 10:11 p.m. PST

Today's post at KeepYourPowderDry goes all geeky and looks at helmet development from the start of the British Civil Wars through to the Restoration.

link

takeda33309 Jan 2023 1:52 a.m. PST

Very interesting article sir! Nice background and explanation.

KeepYourPowderDry09 Jan 2023 2:21 a.m. PST

Thanks Hal. Currently trying to date the use of the term 'lobster' (for both the helmet and Hesilrigge's RoH). Looks like my theory that they are Victorian/Edwardian affectations might be correct.

If anyone is aware of any contemporary usage of the adjective 'lobster'with regard to the helmet or Hesilrigge's RoH then I'd really appreciate it. (Any reference to Haythornthwaite will be treated with the disdain that it deserves 😉)

KeepYourPowderDry09 Jan 2023 6:39 a.m. PST

Lobster, in relation to Hesilrigge's RoH, can be attributed to Lord Byron, so that one is at least a contemporaneous use.

Lobster pot does in fact appear to be a Victorian construct. Along with mortuary sword, and apostles.

Mollinary09 Jan 2023 6:56 a.m. PST

Lobster in relation to Hesilrigge's regiment is also used by Clarendon in his history of the rebellion. He attributes it as a name by which the Royalists described them.

KeepYourPowderDry09 Jan 2023 7:17 a.m. PST

Thanks Andrew. I must confess that I always forget that Clarendon was writing in 1647, I tend to associate him as a Victorian (because his history was reprinted in 1888 I think)

Mollinary09 Jan 2023 7:31 a.m. PST

Just think of the magnificent Nigel Stock playing him in Cromwell, that should fix it in your mind!

Shagnasty Supporting Member of TMP10 Jan 2023 8:53 a.m. PST

Being across the pond I have access to only the standard commercial books and sources. Just what is wrong with Haythornwaite? His illustrations and explanations seem to pretty much match what I've read, except perhaps for the large number of hats and helms vs. Monmouths and monteros.

KeepYourPowderDry10 Jan 2023 3:13 p.m. PST

Haythornthwaite had many many errors in it when it was written. The illustrations, whilst beautiful, are dreadful, with far too many historical errors (even at the time of publication) unfortunately lots of figure designers have taken them as gospel.

The book relies too heavily on secondary sources and repeats errors made by original authors.

Unfortunately a lot of lazy authors have picked up Haythornthwaite and repeated many of his 'facts' without checking them. Thus errors have been repeated and repeated and repeated.

Since it was published research has moved on considerably, compounding the issues that the book has (and for this Haythornthwaite can not be blamed).

It is a very inspiring book, just don't believe much that is presented in it. (There are a few good snippets in there, so not all bad).

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.