There has been an inordinate delay between issues 9 & 10 of Battlefields, in which I fear I have played a small part. I have started a new career (at my age!) and priorities will have to change a little (I need to earn a living). I don't anticipate this being an ongoing situation and trust we can get back to a more regular timetable.

At the time of writing this, which seems aeons ago, I had recently attended the Napoleonic Fair in London. In a conversation with one or two others, the idea was floated that much of today's military history is carried out by "amateurs" -- those whose main activity in life is not military history and who enjoy the subject more as a hobby, either through financial necessity or choice. Naturally, this tends to make their work a little suspect in the eyes of "professional" historians and so detracts from its perceived validity. As a result, a lot of the very real value of their work is not fully acknowledged and it takes on the mantle of being merely "interesting".

Many amateur historians (among whose number I count myself) derive their interest from wargaming; credentials which are viewed by some of the professionals as dubious - not a serious attempt at enlightenment but just a way of passing time. However, as in astronomy, much valuable work is produced by the amateur and, when good research is carried out and is properly referenced and authenticated, there is no stigma to be attached as a consequence of the status of the researcher.

Recently, doubt has been expressed concerning the superiority through firepower of line over column on the Napoleonic battlefield, as propounded by Prof. Sir Charles Oman and accepted by other, later writers - many notable professionals. My fellow conversationalists and I wondered whether this adoption of Oman's views was done without a great deal of examination of their true validity. Some of the recent doubt has been cast by military historians without the stature of Prof. Oman and it seems not to have carried the weight that perhaps it should, in the light of the evidence put forward. Thus the myth has been perpetuated. Modern amateur historians have good reason for their questioning of the superiority of line over column but they find it hard to overcome the inertia generated by a reputation of the type enjoyed by Prof. Oman.

Oman's work was a massive contribution to our knowledge of the War and its attendant political overtones but Oman was not a military expert and did not venture into the field as much as might have been desirable. Someone such as author Ian Fletcher, because of the nature of his work with touring parties to the Peninsula battlefields, has the opportunity to do serious field and archival research but, perhaps also because of this work, there is a danger that his contributions might be seen as of less value than Oman's -- simply because he is not a professional academic historian. Nothing could be further from the truth and we should be wary of taking concepts for granted simply because they are propounded by icons.

On a less esoteric level, I have secured promises from the authors of no less than three commercial sets of rules for the Napoleonic period that they will umpire games at Southend Wargames Club using the same scenario and orders of battle and the same players so that the outcome and process of the games can be compared. The object will be to report the way the rules handle various aspects of the game and how the umpires interpret and adjudicate unexpected situations. We will not aim to criticise the various rule sets although, if queries are raised by the players, we shall invite the authors to explain and clarify if necessary - which will hopefully provide the opportunity for them to review their rules. Our own rules at Southend undergo constant review and revision as a result of members' comments, which is mostly what has prevented us from publishing them. Maybe one day..............?

Our website is at http://members.netscapeonline.co.uk/mikebattlefields where we have started a "self-help" facility in which readers can ask questions and, if they have the info, reply to other readers' questions. Once we have a backlog of these, we will publish them in the magazine. You can e-mail me at mikebattlefields@netscapeonline.co.uk with your offerings either direct or via the website.