Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
General Montcalm by GeneralVyse General Montcalm by GeneralVyse
"General Montcalm - Marquis Louis Joseph de Saint-Veran, known as Montcalm, is the commander of the French forces fighting against England during the French and Indian War. He enlists the aid and knowledge of Indian tribes to help his French forces navigate the unfamiliar forest combat setting. After capturing Fort William Henry, though, he is powerless to prevent the Indian massacre of the English troops."

~[link]

I was intending to Illustrate the Last of the Mohicans, but it appears I've been beaten to it, though like many pre-exisitng Novels its somewhat lacking in integrity. Who knows, maybe i will do the Novel some day.

Keywords: seven years war battle william henry fort the last of the mohican mohicans colonialist general montcalm french army heights of abraham 1757 officer gentleman marquis
Add a Comment:
 
:iconedenianprince:
EdenianPrince Featured By Owner Mar 2, 2015
I just love the Royal French officer uniforms. 
Reply
:iconseimour:
Seimour Featured By Owner Feb 7, 2011
Hmm I probably won't get a reply after so long, but I'd like to say that only 75 settlers got killed. Soldiers and the rest of the settlers were relatively unharmed. The whole thing about a massacre was mostly made up/exagerated by the british soldiers :/. As much as the brits hate us, saying we allowed/encouraged a massacre on them is simply a lie and an insult to Montcalm's memory.
Reply
:icongeneralvyse:
GeneralVyse Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2011
You're quite right, I was just quoting wikipedia at the time, I was very irritated about the film and wanted to make the distinction between it and the book.

I don't hate the french, I love them, I would live in France If I could get a job there!
Reply
:iconseimour:
Seimour Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2011
France isn't that great of a country anymore =P. The film was decent, but they wanted to be dramatic to advance the plot >.>
Reply
:iconvanvanowi:
VanvanOwi Featured By Owner Jan 7, 2010
Very good ! Nice pic ^^

There just one thing that's not really true, that's the uniform. There's the same mistake in the movie. At this time, the uniforms of french army was white, with some blue.

That's a pic of Montcalm on Wikipedia : [link] to take an idea.

But the uniform on your draw is very nice =)
Reply
:icongeneralvyse:
GeneralVyse Featured By Owner Jan 7, 2010
Wow thanks! I was aware of the white uniforms c/o Barry Lyndon etc. but i found a pic in a book for a french officer and it was like the one shown. I have to say i wasnt sure about the colours because i'd seen a lot of British Officers/Gentry wearing Blue Justaucorps, but i thought, "hell the book can't be wrong I'll run with it"

If i get Photoshop running again I'll change it.

Thanks for your help! :D
Reply
:iconvanvanowi:
VanvanOwi Featured By Owner Jan 7, 2010
You're welcome ! If photoshop doesn't run, you can try Gimp, it's almost the same and it's free :)
Aniway you'll have two versions of the pic ^^
Reply
:icongeneralvyse:
GeneralVyse Featured By Owner Jan 17, 2010
Gimp's proving a struggle, but it's better than nothing. Thanks for your help though, i just wish i could resuscitate photoshop but nothing's doing!
Reply
:iconvanvanowi:
VanvanOwi Featured By Owner Jan 7, 2010
After verificating, french officers could have a blue justaucorps like your pic, it's as the want. Some pictures show Montcalm with blue uniform and red pants, others shaw him with white uniform like the soldiers.
Reply
:iconangusmcleod:
AngusMcLeod Featured By Owner Aug 12, 2009  Student Traditional Artist
Here in Québec, he is mostly remembered for dying at the Battaille des Plaines d'Abraham.

And losing it, too.
Reply
:icongeneralvyse:
GeneralVyse Featured By Owner Aug 21, 2009
Yeah, thats right, But before that historic day, he led the french at Fort William Henry too.

I don't know much about his character though, i think he might have been very stubborn at a seige elsewhere - to the cost of french civilian lives - but i may be mistaken...
Reply
:iconsirnelson:
Sirnelson Featured By Owner Jul 16, 2009
Bravo mon général!
Reply
:icongeneralvyse:
GeneralVyse Featured By Owner Jul 17, 2009
Merci Mon Chef!
Reply
:iconsannamak:
SannaMaK Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2009
Awesome again^^ I really like the style you draw! I think that it's quite unique! At least, I have never seen similar :D
Reply
:iconmisscassidy:
MissCassidy Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2009
Verrah nice sir. Verrah nice indeed.
Reply
:icongeneralvyse:
GeneralVyse Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2009
Thankees! :D
Reply
:iconradavik:
Radavik Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2009
Tres bien. Good film, aside from the fact all the British in the film were murdered, and the commanding officer (Scotsman, think his name was Munro), got his heart cut out... Good film though. I can play the music that was used for the theme on pipes too lol.
Reply
:icongeneralvyse:
GeneralVyse Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2009
Sorry Ben, the film's a travesty. The book is based on fact and the only resemblance the film has to the book is the names of the characters. You'd love the book, it's full of honour and decency, in fact the Heyward in the book is a lot like yourself. Honestly, get a copy and read it!

*This is a practice run for my denunciation of the film, so dont take it personally*

In reality, Munro was a good man who was kind to all and died peacefully in albany 3 months after the events of the story. Cora loved Heyward, but Heyward only had eyes for Alice who likewise loved him. The Scout never fell in love with anyone and survived the story. Uncas and Chingachgook were "bad-asses" and kicked ass throughout the story, Uncas becoming cheif, but sadly dying at the hands of the Huron Indians.

The massacre actually took place just in front of William Henry with the French looking on. The Indians decided to massacre the civilians and left the redcoats because they couldnt hope to match them arm for arm. The redcoats couldnt fight back or defend the civilians as they had no powder (part of the surrender) and also because they had formed square.

I could go on, but havent the time.
Reply
:iconradavik:
Radavik Featured By Owner Jul 10, 2009
Didn't mean the film was factually correct. It was just good as a film in itself lol. Like the new Star Trek was good as a film, but ruins all of Star Trek history utterly.
Reply
:icongeneralvyse:
GeneralVyse Featured By Owner Jul 10, 2009
Kind of, but it's suggesting things about pre-revolutionary America that just werent true. There wasn't any anti british feeling at that time.

Anyway, glad you liked the Drawing, How are things?
Reply
:iconradavik:
Radavik Featured By Owner Jul 10, 2009
Not bad. Getting all geared up for this thing in Aberdeen. Just under a month to go. Quite looking forward to it.
Reply
:icongeneralvyse:
GeneralVyse Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2009
Ah yes of course! Good luck with it! I'm hoping to get myself kitted out for the Argyll & Sutherlands - i can adapt it for any era with different tunics as the lower half has barely changed over the centuries.
Reply
:iconradavik:
Radavik Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2009
Actually, it has lol. The kilts of the last 150 years or so are far heavier than they used to be. They use more material to make them today, and more pleats. The older ones were made of less, and had fewer pleats.

The spats which are white today, were grey in the Napoleonic and Crimean eras.

Sporrans were more like square blocks of thick leather (used as armour for your more delicate spot), and were slowly developed to miniature bags.

Hats changed a great deal as well. They started as balmorals, changed to harder and more shapely bonnets with ostrich feathers stuck into one side, upgraded to feather bonnets (made with a wire frame and covered with feathers entirely, often with tails) and today, most have gone to the Glengarry.

I recommend you go for Camerons, Gordons or Black Watch, who's uniforms have changed the least, as they remained their own regiments until the last couple of decades. Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders have amalgamated about 4 times, even during the Napoleonic era lol. (The name is one example, having been separate once).

ANYWAY, think you might go? The Queen is expected to be there.
Reply
:iconj-jammer:
J-Jammer Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2009
The romantic times of the past. =P Well they are when thought of here in the future....but during their time it was just hot, bloody and difficult with a sense of duty wrapped in.

I like your eye for detail. It's not just drawn it's loved like a writer describing the clothes piece by piece.
Reply
:icongeneralvyse:
GeneralVyse Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2009
I made up a lot of this one, based on what i know of French/British uniforms of the Era. Glad you appreciate the detail, it's actually very simple, probably looks more impressive than it is!

But yes,the time of cool coats and long marches!
:salute:
Reply
:iconj-jammer:
J-Jammer Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2009
Cool coats indeed.
Reply
:iconbriantk2003:
briantk2003 Featured By Owner Jul 8, 2009
I was told that he did his best to protect the retreating English troops which mostly escaped unharmed, but the settlers weren't so lucky.
Reply
:icongeneralvyse:
GeneralVyse Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2009
Thats quite right! The British troops formed square, but for some reason didnt march to the help of the settlers. They had of course no powder in their weapons as they'd surrendered so all they could do was fend off the Indians with bayonets.

Impressive scene, if only the film could have been remotely accurate...
Reply
:iconbriantk2003:
briantk2003 Featured By Owner Jul 10, 2009
I was told soldiers suffered less because they gave up any spoils the Indians wanted.
Reply
:icongeneralvyse:
GeneralVyse Featured By Owner Jul 10, 2009
That too, but the bayonet's stopped them taking everything. You probably know more than me!
Reply
:icontregnier2795:
TRegnier2795 Featured By Owner Jul 8, 2009
The thing I don't like is that he appears to be slightly cross-eyed.
Reply
:icongeneralvyse:
GeneralVyse Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2009
Have a little look-see now, thats the head as i originally did it on the left, and on the right the 'aged' version. I prefer the left.
Reply
:icontregnier2795:
TRegnier2795 Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2009
I like them both. The eyes give character. ;p
Reply
:icongeneralvyse:
GeneralVyse Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2009
I think you're right, but then i think his heads a mess full stop. I'll try and figure something out.
Reply
:icongeneralvyse:
GeneralVyse Featured By Owner Jul 8, 2009
I'm not sure of the Historical accuracy with this one and i drew him younger, but i was advised he should be an Older rounder faced man. I may work on this one again.
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×
Download JPG 1357 × 3198




Details

Submitted on
July 8, 2009
Image Size
3.0 MB
Resolution
1357×3198
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
3,052 (1 today)
Favourites
35 (who?)
Comments
35
Downloads
378
×