Sunday, 10 May 2026

Monday Boer War Cartoon

This next Boer War cartoon is from November 29th1899. We see a lion advancing through a rocky southern African landscape, underneath which is the title ADVANCING. There is no further caption.

 


To me, this cartoon really displays misplaced confidence. The lion is surely the British lion, and I’ve said before that when Tenniel uses this particular representation of Britain he is usually doing so to stress the power and might of Britain and the British Empire. By the time that the cartoon was published, Boer forces were besieging Ladysmith, Kimberley and Mafeking and public opinion in Britain pretty much demanded that actions were taken to end the sieges. The advance that the cartoon seems to be referring to may well have been Lord Methuen’s advance with three brigades with the intention of raising the siege of Kimberley. On 23rd November 1899 the forces ran into 2000 entrenched Boers on Belmont Kopje (hill). Poor tactics and inaccurate maps resulted in large casualties, although the British could claim victory of a sort after eventually driving the tenacious Boers into retreat.

However, Methuen’s forces would suffer losses and then a serious defeat on 11th December in Magersfontein. As for Kimberley, the siege would continue until the following February. 


Saturday, 9 May 2026

Sunday Boer War Cartoon

Today’s John Tenniel Boer War cartoon is another from 1899, published on 1st November, right at the time when large numbers of soldiers were being sent to South Africa on ships.

 

Jack Tar “GOOD LUCK, MATE! YOU’RE GOIN’ TO DO THE JOB ON LAND.
IF THERE’S ANYTHING WANTED AT SEA – AGAINST OTHER PARTIES – I’M ON!”

The title is “TO THOSE IT MAY CONCERN”. The caption beneath this is –

Jack Tar “GOOD LUCK, MATE! YOU’RE GOIN’ TO DO THE JOB ON LAND. IF THERE’S ANYTHING WANTED AT SEA – AGAINST OTHER PARTIES – I’M ON!”

The message seems pretty straightforward, a message of support for the troops heading off to war and also one of confidence in them. As for what the sailor says, maybe I’m reading too much into it, but perhaps this is meant as a reminder that Britain had the most powerful navy in the world. The mention of other parties suggests an awareness that international opinion was pretty solidly against the British Empire, and this is a recognition of the Royal Navy as a deterrent to other countries becoming involved militarily, which I have no doubt that it was.

Other countries did not intervene officially. However, volunteer units who fought for the Boers were formed from Dutch, German and Irish volunteers, and volunteers came from many other parts of Europe. The influx of volunteers began to arrive immediately with the declaration of war and would continue at the rate of about 600 men a month.

Again, maybe I’m reading too much into what appears to be a pretty straightforward cartoon, but I do, with the benefit of hindsight, see an overconfidence here. Despite the lessons of the First Boer War, less than a decade earlier, it does seem to be true that at all levels of British society people did seem to genuinely believe that the British Empire army would just quickly steamroller the Boers into submission in a few weeks.

Didn’t happen

Friday, 8 May 2026

Saturday - Boer War Cartoon

The next John Tenniel Boer War cartoon I’ve copied was published just a few days before war was declared. Here it is.

JOHN BULL (to Orange Free State) “STAND ASIDE YOUNG MAN-
I’VE NO QUARREL WITH YOU!”

 

JOHN BULL (to Orange Free State) “STAND ASIDE YOUNG MAN- I’VE NO QUARREL WITH YOU!”

It’s titled A Word to the Un-Wise. Basically this is Britain, in the shape of John Bull, warning Orange Free State not to get involved in the looming conflict with the Republic of Transvaal. The caption – I’ve no quarrel with you! – is disingenuous. It was never a question that Orange Free State would not be involved in the Boer War, but even if it had not been I can’t believe that the British Empire would not have annexed the republic again even without the excuse of the war. As it was, though, the two Boer Republics had concluded a military pact in 1897.

I find it interesting that Tenniel chose to depict John Bull in army uniform. The subtext to me seems to be – look, this war is going to happen, and if you have any sense whatsoever you’ll keep out of our way, or we’ll crush you like we’re going to crush them. – The caption, calling Orange Free State ‘young man’ is very patronising. Also, the Boer from the Transvaal is the only one of the three figures with a visible gun, a way of suggesting without saying so outright that it is Boer aggression that can be blamed for bringing the countries to the brink of war.

Fair? No, I don’t think so. With hindsight, following the Jameson Raid, and with the British Government’s refusal to compromise on terms for addressing the grievances of the Uitlanders, war was pretty much inevitable.

Thursday, 7 May 2026

Friday - Boer War Cartoon

My 4th Tenniel cartoon from the Boer War is this one titled “The Sinews of War”. It was published in Punch magazine on 18th October 1899, exactly one week after war was declared.

JOHN BULL. “FIRE AWAY JOE! I’M WITH YOU! I’LL LOOK AFTER THE AMMUNITION!”


You can see John Bull (for more about this allegorical personification of England see my previous post) standing behind a British soldier, sat at his machine gun, in what is presumably a South African landscape. The caption reads,

JOHN BULL. “FIRE AWAY JOE! I’M WITH YOU! I’LL LOOK AFTER THE AMMUNITION!”

This pretty much reflects a few beliefs about the situation at the outset of the war. The British public were overwhelmingly in support of the war when this cartoon was published, but as the war progressed the tide of opinion would turn against it, especially when Emily Hobhouse published her findings on the concentration camps in 1901. In the second half of 1900 support was strong enough to see the Conservative Party win what was nicknamed the Khaki Election on the back of recent victories, but when it became clear that the war was not over and the Boers were continuing to fight, public support waned.

As regards weaponry and ammunition, there is some justification to the claim asserted here that Britain would supply the army well. The guns and artillery was probably as good as the German weaponry with which the Boers had rearmed during the build up to the war. Crucially though it wasn’t significantly better, while this cartoon reflects the mistaken belief that the British army would have a technological advantage.

Today's Boer War Cartoon

 It is with a sense of relief that I finished today’s copy of a Tenniel Boer War cartoon. I made yesterday’s copies before having a second laser operation on my eye, and after a night’s sleep it seems as if everything is as it was and I have been able to make a decent enough fist of a sketch. Here it is.

JOHN BULL (TO BOER) – “AS YOU WILL FIGHT, YOU SHALL HAVE
IT. 
THIS TIME IT’S A FIGHT TO A FINISH.” October 1899
 

This one appeared in October 1899, the year that the war broke out. The picture shows John Bull squaring up to a Boer farmer ( the word Boer itself means farmer). John Bull was/is an allegorical personification of England. Ironically he was created by a Scottish writer, John Arbuthnot, in 1712, to satirise the English nation, but something about the character appealed to the English nation (or an influential part of it) and its view of itself. John Bull was one of three allegorical personification of Britain that Tenniel regularly used. That's Britain, not just England, although one often suspects that for Tenniel, Britain was England. The other two were Britannia, and the British Lion. Britannia he used when trying to show Britain’s compassion and sympathetic aspects – hence his use of the figure in yesterday’s cartoon, Britannia Consolatrix. The British Lion he used to symbolise the might of the British Empire, and he did use it in several of his cartoons regarding the war. John Bull here stands for the solid, dependable qualities of the people of Britain, small c conservative, fair, slow to anger but steadfast in the defence of what he sees to be right.

The title is “Plain English” while beneath this there is the caption :-

“JOHN BULL (TO BOER) – “AS YOU WILL FIGHT, YOU SHALL HAVE IT. THIS TIME IT’S A FIGHT TO A FINISH.”

This needs some explanation. It’s probably best that I start with a slight digression. When I wrote yesterday of the Boer War as an unjust and unnecessary war, this is what I really feel about it. Which does not mean that I’m trying to paint the two Boer Republics as admirable nations. Their attitudes towards black native African nations was awful, for example. But it is not as if the British were motivated to fight in order to ameliorate conditions for native Africans. No, they were motivated by Imperialistic shortsightedness, and led on by the greed of men like Cecil Rhodes. Just my opinion and as always, feel free to disagree. 

So, as a background to the cartoon, Great Britain annexed the two Boer republics in the 1870s. Despite repeated attempts at negotiating a peaceful solutions, Boer representatives were rebuffed time after time, and this led to rebellion and the first Boer War in December 1880. Superior tactics, and a British army that was poorly led and equipped , along with Prime Minister William Gladstone’s sensible refusal to allow the war to escalate into a more costly and wasteful conflict led to the war concluding in March of 1881 and a treaty which led to the reestablishment and independence of the two Boer Republics. So that’s what Tenniel means when he says ‘THIS time’.

Had gold not been discovered in the Transvaal, then the conditions that led to the Second Boer War may never have arisen. In the 1890s, the Uitlanders – a Boer term for foreigners, that is, prospectors and gold miners lured by the gold rush,- chafed at what they saw as the exorbitant taxes they had to pay, bearing in mind that they were ineligible to vote until they had lived there for 14 years. The Boer governments were willing to enter into negotiation with the British government which took up their cause and proved willing to move on this. However the inflexibility of the British convinced them that war was inevitable, even though Transvaal premier Paul Kruger would say that declaring war on the British Empire was like defending yourself against a lion with a pocket knife. So strictly speaking Tenniel was not incorrect to suggest that the Boer republics started the fight – they declared war – but they really were given no choice, despite knowing that their chances of success were limited.

The overall sense of the cartoon, although very much in line with public opinion in Britain at the time, for Tenniel had an instinctive feel for this, is unfair, presenting Britain as a long-suffering injured party. 


Wednesday, 6 May 2026

Return to the Sketchbook challenge

Yeah, I know. It has actually been several weeks since I last did any drawings at all. Why? Well, if a personal challenge is becoming a chore sometimes you’re just as well giving yourself a little break from it, rather than risk giving it up entirely. That’s my excuse and I’m sticking to it. Still, yesterday I did pick up my pens and my sketchbook. So what have I been doing.

Well, to start with I made 2 sketches of London featuring buses and trams of years gone by. To be honest with you I wasn’t that impressed with the first that I made. The second was better, but took ages. So I decided to fall back on an old favourite and made a copy of a John Tenniel cartoon from Punch. This one depicts Old Father Thames, although I do believe that it is from some time after the Great Stink, bearing in mind that looks like the Embankment.

This morning I thought, I wonder what Tenniel made of the (2nd) Boer War? Bearing in mind that while I love his skill and artistry, politically I am poles apart from Tenniel, I wasn’t expecting to like what I found that much. So far I have copied two of his cartoons made in 1899 at the outset of the Boer War. The first is called Kruger’s Vision.



Paul Kruger was President of the Transvaal, one of the two Boer Republics. The caption is “What, will the ‘thin red’ line stretch unto the crack of doom?”. This is an adaptation of a quote from Shakespeare’s “Macbeth”. In the play, on his second visit to the witches, he insists that they show him whether Banquo’s descendants will ever rule. At first they refuse, but he insists and they show him a line of kings descended from Banquo, and he asks the question.

In Tenniel’s cartoon, Kruger is not seeing kings, but columns of British and Empire troops, showing him the irresistible might of the forces ranged against him, and also subtly suggesting that Kruger and the Boers are just as doomed as Macbeth, considering the overwhelming weight of numbers able to be brought against them.

What the cartoon and Tenniel ignored was that in 1881, a few years earlier, the same British and Empire army were defeated by the same Boer Republics in the first Boer War, where superior tactics and marksmanship had prevailed, the same superior tactics and marksmanship that would cause huge setbacks to the British and Empire army in the early stages of this second Boer War.

This second cartoon depicts a scene where a troopship in the distance is setting sail for South Africa, and Britannia is consoling a wife and children, whose husband, presumably, is on board the ship. The title is “Britannia Consolatrix” and the caption beneath reads:- ‘I will take care of you! Your man has gone to do his duty – and I will do mine!’ There’s a lot I don’t like about this. Firstly, the idea that it was anyone’s duty to go and fight in South Africa. Even judging by 19th century standards this was an unjust and unnecessary war.

Then there’s the idea that Britain, represented by the allegorical figure Britannia, would do its duty, and take care of the casualties of war and their families. Now, I will admit that it was in 1901 that pensions were paid to war widows of NCOs and other ranks. But this had not been on the table in 1899 when the cartoon was made. Nor was it very generous when it was made, and it was subject to strict conditions regarding conduct and being of good character. Should a war widow remarry, she would receive a very small sum and the pension would cease.

Even in the 21st century we see British army veterans having to accept help from charities because of the injuries, mental and physical, that they received in the name of our country which are not catered for by the Ministry of Defence. So you can imagine just how little real help was available to veterans of the Boer War on their return to Britain.

Wednesday, 22 April 2026

Cadbury's - Not flavour of the month with Charlie

When you get right down to it, it’s very difficult to know what members of the Royal Family really feel about things. The higher you go up the pyramid, the less scope that they have to be partial. So I don’t actually know if His Majesty the King really doesn’t like chocolate. But buying the Rowntree’s Edward VII Coronation tin has made me do a little bit of light research about the connection between the royal family and chocolate. What do you know, I found out that King Charles has withdrawn the Royal Warrant from Cadbury’s chocolate, and if I’m correct this is the first time they haven’t had one for over 170 years.

Queen Victoria first granted the Royal Warrant in 1854. We can be pretty certain that she was a bit of a fan from the way that Cadbury’s were her first port of call when she wanted to send a present of the finest British chocolate to soldiers fighting in the Boer War.

The Royal household doesn’t go into details about why companies lose their warrant, but since 2010 Cadbury’s have been owned by US based Mondelez International. It’s believed that the King faced calls to withdraw warrants from companies still operating in Russia, as does Mondelez. Has it made a material difference to Cadbury’s? I doubt it. All it means is a certain loss of cache, no invitation to warrant holder shindigs and having to remove the crown logo from packaging.

The silly thing about all of this is, I can’t eat chocolate now because my blood sugar is way too high as it is!

Tuesday, 21 April 2026

Tin Tales - Supplemental

Oh dear, I’ve been buying tins again. Or to be specific, a tin. I didn’t actually plan to. But if you ‘suffer’ from having a collector’s gene, you’ll maybe understand how it is. You see, since completing my Victoria tins collection, I’ve been doing the odd bit of research, sniffing around the subject. I was researching just what sort of tins each of the three chocolate companies was producing on or after the turn of the 20th century. I came upon a Rowntree’s chocolate tin made for the 1902 coronation of King Edward VII (God Bless ‘Im!) and Queen Alexandra. I was interested in what seemed to me to be clear similarities in design to the Victoria tins.

So, as you do, I thought to myself, well, I wonder how much they go for on Ebay and I had a look. And without boring you with figures, you can pay a lot for a particularly fine one, but a decent one will set you back quite a bit less than a decent Victoria tin. So I thought – that’s interesting – and went on my way.

Now, if you’re not an ebayer you might not be aware of this. When you are the first person for ages to show interest in an item with a long listing, the dealers get alerted and will sometimes knock a bit off the price and offer it to you for a limited time. It happened to me with the Rowntree’s coronation tin and before I came to my senses, I bought it. It arrived today. Here it is:-

Rowntree's 1902 Edward VII Coronation Commemorative chocolate tin. If you've been following my posts about the Boer War Chocolate tins, this surely looks familiar to you as well.
Now the red background and the blue border are very reminiscent of the Victoria tin. That’s surely deliberate. When there’s nothing to compare it with in the photograph it’s difficult to get a feeling for the tin’s dimensions. To me it looked to be a similar size to the Cadbury’s Boer War Tin. Well, that was wrong. Here it is compared with the Rountree’s Boer War Tin.

Above - Rowntree's Boer War Chocolate tin. Nowhere does it actually say Rowntree's but there are a couple of distinguishing marks.
Bottom - Rowntree's Coronation commemorative chocolate tin - this is actually stamped Rowntree's on the bottom of the tin.
What you can’t see from the picture is that it’s very thin too. Well, it’s a nice thing. I don’t plan to start collecting coronation and other royal commemorative items. But as everyone with a passing acquaintance with the collector’s gene knows, never say never.

Saturday, 11 April 2026

Tin Tales - Collection complete

Yes, I have bought a Fry’s 1900 Queen Victoria Boer War chocolate tin. Yes, I paid more for it than I paid for either the Rowntree’s or Cadbury’s tins, but I was comfortable with the price and it completes the set.

Top - Cadbury's
Middle - Rowntree's
Bottom - Fry's

In case you haven’t read any of my previous posts on the subject, I became interested in the gift tins ent by the Royal Family to members of the Armed Forces during both the First World War and the Boer War. Queen Victoria decided in 1899 that she wanted to send a gift to each soldier, NCO and officer serving in South Africa in the Second Boer War. The gift would take the form of ½ lb of finest British chocolate in a presentation tin. She originally commissioned Cadbury’s. They, being a quaker firm, did not want to profit from war, but a commission from Queen Victoria was a difficult one to refuse.In the end, they shared the commission with fellow quaker firms Fry’s and Rowntree’s. The three firms would donate the chocolate, while Victoria would pay for the making of the tins and the shipping to South Africa. The firms refused to put their names or logos on the tins, although Victoria insisted that the firm’s name would be stamped on the chocolate, so that her boys would know she was sending them the best British chocolate.

Each firm used its own manufacturer to make the tins. They all followed the same design, but there are differences to be seen between the tns used by the three manufacturers. And this is why I now have three tins and not just the one. The collector’s gene compels me.

Now, the three tins are in different conditions, so I won’t point out any of the differences in shade of colour because this could just be a matter of condition. But here’s a few of the features of difference between the tins.

The most obvious difference which you can see from the photo of all 3 tins is that the Cadbury’s tin is slightly longer and slightly narrower than the others. The Rowntree’s and Fry’s have almost identical proportions to each other.

The medallions of Queen Victoria in the centre of the tins help us to distinguish.

Rowntree's

Fry's


Cadbury's


Now, try to ignore the fact that each of these as a different amount of gilding remaining. If you look at the top photo of the 3, the Rowntree’s tin, close up, you can see that the beads around the edge are almost square, compared to the beads on the middle photo the Fry’s tin. These are more oval and slightly bigger. I’m not suggesting you should count them, but if you did you’d see there are more beads on the Fry’s. On the bottom photo of the Cadbury’s tin you can see that the beads are small, but there is a prominent raised and bevelled edge around them.

If you look at the black ovals I have drawn on the first two photographs, they highlight that the image of the Queen on the Fry’s tin is much closer to the beading than it is on the Rowntree’s tin. The Cadbury’s is close to the beading too.

Each tin bears a printed message of New Year’s good wishes with Queen Victoria’s signature.

Rowntree's


Fry's


Cadbury's


Comparing the signatures on the Rowntree and Fry tins, the most obvious difference is that the signature on the Rowntree’s slants upwards. As for the Cadbury’s, the signature appears smaller and more compact.

Well, that's it. The collection is now complete and the collector's gene should be satisfied.

Saturday, 4 April 2026

Nassau v. W.H.Smith own brand - comparison

Yesterday I used the 40th page in my Crawford and Black sketchbook. This means there are only 120 pages left in it which I think is reasonable if I decide to use it as the next sketchbook in the sketchbook challenge. I’ve got 39 pages left in the Nassau now which means we should be finished with it in a fortnight. I decided to put the Crawford and Black to one side for the time being and to switch to the WH Smith I bought last week as secondary sketchbook.

I thought I’d do some testing on the WH Smith. It already had the old bus sketch that I made last week. I decided to make a picture using coloured fineliner. Then it occurred to me this morning to make a comparison picture n the Nassau – same coloured fineliner, similar subject. Here they are.

Top - W.H.Smith own brand
Bottom - Nassau 


In terms of quality it’s not easy to say that either one is much better than the other. Maybe it’s because of the paper colour but the lines on the Nassau do seem to merge together more making the picture a little less distinct than the picture in the WH Smiths. I found this happened when I used coloured fine liner in the Royal Talens which also had off white paper. I made the point that the paper in the WH Smiths book reminds a lot of the paper in the Derwent Academy and again, when I made this sketch I really enjoyed the feel of the pen on the paper. With the W.H. Smith you can only see a few dots where the ink has gone through to the other side of the page. With the Nassau it’s far worse.

In the same spirit of investigation I took today’s photo prompt on Faacebook’s Daily Drawing challenge and did it in watercolour in both books. I used the same photo promt, the same set of paints and even the same brush. Here they are:-

Top - WH Smith own brand
Bottom - NAssau


Again, I would not say that there is really a great deal in it. The colours in the Nassau book look a little warmer than in the Smiths. That’s probably the effect of the off white paper on the tonal values. It was the Nassau version that I posted in the Facebook group because I think it’s slightly better.

Where the WH Smith book is clearly superior you can see when you turn the page over. With the Smith book there’s just a tiny bit of buckling but the other side of the page is perfectly usable. In the Nassau book, where I painted the peppers the other side of the page and to an extent the page underneath it has waffled and cockled very badly, so much so that the page looks as if it will be extremely unpleasant to draw upon.

Wednesday, 1 April 2026

Tin Tales Update

On 8th March I posted about my collection of Mary tins, real, replicas and fakes, and I described how I had branched out and bought the tin that maybe inspired the Mary tin, the chocolate tin that Queen Victoria sent as a New Year gift in 1900 for the soldiers in the British and Empire armies in South Africa. I explained how I found out that the tins were made by three firms, Cadbury’s, Rowntree’s and Fry’s and that each firm had their own manufacturer. Although none of the firms put their own names on the box and although they all used the same design it is possible to tell which tins were made by which company.

So I bought a tin and was able to identify it as having been made by Rowntree’s. I did say in the post that I wasn’t planning to add to my collection, although the Cadbury’s and Fry’s tins were still out there. . .

Famous last words. I bought a Cadbury’s tin that arrived today. How can I tell it’s Cadbury’s though? Well, have a look at the tin on its own first.

The Queen Victoria Boer War chocolate tin from Cadbury

Okay. Now let’s compare it with my Rowntree’s tin. 

Top - Rowntree tin - Bottom - Cadbury Tin


You can see that they’re very similar at first glance but you can’t help noticing that the dimensions of the tins are different. Cadbury’s tin, on the bottom of the picture is noticeably narrower than Rowntree’s and slightly longer. When you pick them up, the Cadbury’s tin feels ever so slightly heavier but there’s really not a lot in it.

For reference here’s the two tins with the genuine Princess Mary tin.



Of course, it now means that I’ll have to try and get hold of a Fry’s tin. My collector gene demands it.

Friday, 27 March 2026

When is a W.H.Smith store not a W.H.Smith store?

In 1792, Henry Walton Smith and his wife Anna established a business as news vendors in London. The same year, their son William Henry Smith was born. If you’ve reached adulthood in the UK, then even though the full name might not mean a lot to you, I’m sure that you’ll recognise the shortened version – W.H. Smith. William Henry took over the business following his parent’s deaths, and his son, young William Henry, joined, upon which the business was renamed W.H.Smith and Sons. It was the second William Henry who hit upon the idea of selling newspapers and books in the great train termini that were springing up in London by the 1840s, an idea which led to W.H.Smith becoming one of the great British retail names in the 20th century.

I still remember the excitement at getting a WH Smiths gift voucher for Christmas. When I was growing up in suburban West London in the 1970s there were two places most of us went to buy records, or books, or stationery and those were W.H. Smith in Ealing Broadway and Woolworth in West Ealing (and Ealing Broadway.) W.H. Smith was generally more expensive and a bit posher. While Woolworth’s nickname was the chummy, down to earth ‘Woolies’ , W.H. Smith’s was the rather staid and formal ‘Smith’s’ The building in Ealing Broadway was built upon the foundations of the Ealing Hippodrome music hall and theatre, and the basement was incorporated into the pit which housed the stage machinery. Woolworth was cheaper and a bit more downmarket, although it had the advantage of being closer to home.

Woolworth in the Uk closed its doors for the last time in 2009 – although I was delighted to discover a Woolworths just around the corner from where I was staying in East Berlin in 2017. But good old W.H. Smith just kept on keeping on.

Yesterday, then I happened to be in the nearest city to home, Swansea. I had a brainwave – having acquired and started to use a variety of ‘cheap’ own brand sketchbooks, why not pop into Smiths and buy one of theirs? So when I arrived in the Quadrant shopping centre in Swansea, I was quite dismayed to see that W.H. Smith was no longer there. Instead, a new shop called T.G.Jones. Yeah, okay, I probably should have put two and two together, but it wasn’t until I entered the store and saw that almost everything was just as it had been before that I worked it out. T.G.Jones IS W.H.Smith. Sort of.

I was able to buy this sketchbook. 



All I can give you now is my first impression since I only bought it yesterday and I have only made one drawing in it so far. Here it is:-



It’s a true A5 and it consists of 100 pages (50 sheets) of 135gsm paper. It does feel thinner and less substantial than many of the books I’ve used. I bought it for £7, which means that the price per page is 7p. That’s not exorbitant, but it means it is quite a bit more expensive than some other own brands which are cheaper and have considerably more pages.

The pages in the W.H.Smith book are a very bright white and they have a smooth surface. In fact, it reminds me of the paper in the Derwent Academy book. I have to say that after confining myself to the quite scratchy surface in the Nassau book and the very scratchy surface in the Crawford and Black book, making a drawing in this sketchbook was just a pure pleasure. There’s absolutely no show through of the black fineliner on the other side of the page and I have to say that I’m really rather pleased with the result. I do wish that the pages would lie flatter when you open the book though.

In terms of construction, its covers are a fairly generic cloth backed arrangement. It has no integral bookmark, no document pocket and no elastic fastening. The covers could be a little more appealing but these things aren’t that important to me and I can live without them. The important thing is the quality of the paper.

Of course it will be a while before I’m going to be using it on a daily basis and we’ve yet to see how it can handle coloured fineliner or watercolour. But my first impressions are that you can do a lot worse for your money. Mind you, I don’t know how long you’re going to be able to still buy yourself one of these. I’ll try to explain.

W.H.Smith sold all of their stores and their non-travel business to Modella Capital in 2025. They had rationalised that up to 80% of their proft was coming from the travel business, so they retained their travel stores and also retained the W.H.Smith name. So Modella needed to rebrand their old WH Smith stores. So – W.H. becomes T.G. Smith becomes Jones. Okay. So you can see how they would be selling off old W.H.Smith stock. But does that mean they will then rebrand all their own brand stuff as T.G.Jones? Maybe. But on the other hand, Modella Capital already own Hobbycraft. I’m no business guru but I can see some crossover here. Will we see for example T.G.Jones using the Hobbycraft own brand, Shore and Marsh, as it’s own house brand too? I don’t know, but it has to be a possibility.

Well, time will tell about that. But what I’m thinking is that when I finish the Nassau, being as there are only 100 pages to fill – well, 99 now, I may well bump the Smiths sketchbook up the order and keep piggybacking the Crawford and Black until the Smiths is finished. It’s brains for thinking and feet for dancing.

Thursday, 26 March 2026

Crawford and Black Bus Drawing

You know, it has recently struck me how, when you get into a challenge you can become so single minded about it that you don’t realise that the challenge has led you off in different directions that weren’t actually part of your initial intentions for it.

When I began the challenge it was just about concentrating on finishing my unfinished sketchbooks and that was quickly formalised into using up as many A5 sketchbooks as I can in 12 months. It then made sense to try out and compare as many different brands as I could. After all, by the time yu’ve filled a sketchbook you should have a really good appreciations of its strengths and weaknesses

With hindsight I can see a new element coming into the challenge when I started buying cheapy cheap own brand sketching journals. In one way this is a little bit of an exercise in masochism. When I was coming to the end of my Leuchtturm 1917 sketchbook I was faced with the fact that I had one more proprietary brand left – the Nassau  - before I would have to choose between going back to an unfinished Moleskine – already having filled one Moleskine during the challenge, or starting on the own brands. Obviously I was going t have to go with the own brands and this is why I came up with the two books running concurrently idea (see earlier posts).

Now, the Nassau book is not, frankly, top quality, but the Crawford and Black really does not have good quality paper in it at all. But I made a sketch in it yesterday. I spent a couple of hours on it and frankly I found myself becoming absorbed in the effort to make it the best sketch in it that I could. Here’s a sketch I would have been pleased to make in any of my sketchbooks.

Crawford and Back sketchbook 


Though I do say so I’m pretty pleased with this drawing. The paper in the Crawford and Black is not an enjoyable surface on which to sketch, but you can get decent results on it if you’re prepared to have patience and persevere. Here’s a couple of my other bus and tram pictures to compare it with:-

Amazon Basics sketchbook


Amazon Basics Sketchbook


Royal Talens Art Creations Sketchbook

Royal Talens Art Creations Sketchbook


Canson Mixed Media Sketchbook

Derwent Academy Sketchbook

Leuchtturm 1917 Sketchbook

Moleskine Sketchbook

Seawhite Sketchbook

Sunday, 22 March 2026

Challenge Update

So let’s see where we are with the sketchbook challenge. I’ll start with the Nassau sketchbook. I’ve now made 38 pictures within it and I’m on target to finish it about the 20th April. Yesterday I decided it was time to try watercolour in it. First of all I made this painting of Paris.



My first thought was that the The colours are a little washed out compared with the Crawford and Black I painted in last week. The cockling is not apparent in this scan, but it really is pretty bad, and it hasn’t just affected the other side of the page, but also the next page and the page after. There is just a spot where the colour leaked through onto the other side of the page. Well, it did occur to me that I had not made a painting that used wet on wet so much in the C and B, so I made another picture in pretty much the same way that I made the painting in the C and B last week.



The parrot is a better picture than Paris, but again, it still looks a little washed out. The cockling on the other side of the page hasn’t stopped me drawing on it, but it’s there.

Well, here’s some of the sketches I’ve made this week in it.








They’re okay – the 274 bus is quite a nice picture, but it took a long time to get that kind of result in this book. These were all done with a 0.2mm fine liner, and I find the surface can be a little scratchy at times. It’s harder to get subtle differences in tone with shading. I’m almost 40 pages in, which will be a third of the book, so I’ve no doubt I’ll be able to keep going and finish it, but it’s really not very enjoyable.

I’ve made a few more pictures in the Crawford and Black too. Only 5 this week, but we’ve used 26 pages of it now and we only need to use 40 in order to reduce the number of pages left to 120 which will be quite reasonable. Here’s some scans of this week’s pictures.






I don’t see a difference in quality from those in the Nassau book. There’s not a lot in it but I’d say that the surface of the C & B is rougher than the Nassau and consequently slightly less easy and less enjoyable to draw in. I will give you another update next week.

Sunday, 15 March 2026

It's Tommy this and Tommy that

Last week I wrote a post about how my Mary tin collection has now been augmented by a Queen Victoria (2nd) Boer War Chocolate tin. 



I said in that post “the Boer War was not, in my opinion, Great Britain’s finest hour as a country and it’s certainly not a part of our shared history that I would personally celebrate.” I will certainly stick by this. If you need reasons, well, the British invention of concentration camps, in which a conservative estimate of 26,000 died of disease and starvation ought to be enough. Add that to the fact that the grounds for war were extremely shaky, and the end of the war saw the annexation of the two Boer republics, to which the British Empire had no legitimate claim other than by right of conquest.

So as I say, it’s not in my opinion something to remember with pride. But then war is not. War is not always a case of good against evil, nor right against wrong. I think Siegfried Sassoon put it in a nutshell when he spoke of writing about ‘the pity of war’. Sassoon, of course, was writing about the First World War. The first World War left a lasting and definitive mark upon the UK, partly because it was the first war which put citizens at home in danger and partly because there must have been few, if any families who did not lose someone to death of injury. According to the Imperial War Museum there are over 100,000 memorials to the fallen of the two World Wars throughout the UK. Not all of these are public statues or significant monuments, but there’s still probably not many towns of any size that don’t have some form of memorial. I wondered if there are any memorials to the Boer War. According to Google, there’s between 1000 – 2000. Now, I would still imagine that a significant proportion are plaques of different sizes in Parish churches, but nonetheless it surprises me that there are that many.

I’ve made two sketches on the subject. This first one, made in the Leuchtturm 1917 book as one of the last sketches in it, is based on a photograph from the time.

I imagine that this shows the kind of scene which would have occurred when the Tommies received their New Year chocolate gift tins. Incidentally, I did read that it cost Queen Victoria 3d (three old pence) to have each tin manufactured and sent to South Africa. Many of the soldiers wanted to send their tins home to their families, and when they did so they found that they would have to pay five shillings – a very significant amount of money back then.

Which kind of tells you a lot about how the soldiers were treated. Consideration was given to introducing conscription into the British Army for the Boer War, but this was rejected. Every man was a volunteer, and what really interests me is the way that the soldiers were treated. The finest Local Education Advisor for English for the old West Glamorgan as was, Phil, once suggested to me that we shouldn’t be only concentrating of the poetry of the Great War, and he introduced me to Kipling’s Barrack Room Ballads, in particular this poem, Tommy, from 1890 –

TOMMY.’

I went into a public-’ouse to get a pint o’ beer,

The publican ’e up an’ sez, ‘We serve no red-coats here.’

The girls be’ind the bar they laughed an’ giggled fit to die,

I outs into the street again an’ to myself sez I:

O it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ ‘Tommy go away’:

But it’s ‘Thank you, Mister Atkins,’ when the band begins to play,

The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,

O it’s ‘Thank you, Mister Atkins,’ when the band begins to play.

 

I went into a theatre as sober as could be,

They give a drunk civilian room, but ’adn’t none for me;

They sent me to the gallery or round the music ’alls,

But when it comes to fightin’, Lord! they’ll shove me in the stalls.

For it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ ‘Tommy wait outside."

But it’s ‘Special train for Atkins’ when the trooper’s on the tide,

The troopship’s on the tide, my boys, etc.

 

O makin’ mock o’ uniforms that guard you while you sleep

Is cheaper than them uniforms, an’ they’re starvation cheap;

An’ hustlin’ drunken sodgers when they’re goin’ large a bit

Is five times better business than paradin’ in full kit.

Then it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ ‘Tommy, ’ow’s yer soul?’

But it’s ‘Thin red line of ’eroes’ when the drums begin to roll,

The drums begin to roll, my boys, etc.

 

We aren’t no thin red ’eroes, nor we aren’t no black-guards too,

But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;

An’ if sometimes our conduck isn’t all your fancy paints;

Why, single men in barricks don’t grow into plaster saints.

While it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ ‘Tommy fall be’ind’;

But it’s ‘Please to walk in front, sir,’ when there’s trouble in the wind,

There’s trouble in the wind, my boys, etc.

 

You talk o’ better food for us, an’ schools, an’ fires, an’ all;

We’ll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.

Don’t mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face

The Widow’s uniform is not the soldier-man’s disgrace.

For it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ ‘Chuck him out, the brute!’

But it’s ‘Saviour of ’is country’ when the guns begin to shoot;

An’ it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ everything you please;

An’ Tommy ain’t a bloomin’ fool — you bet that Tommy sees!


RUDYARD KIPLING.

Isn’t that wonderful? Makes you think again about Kipling, who’s often seen as the fully paid up, jingoistic poet laureate of Imperialism. Mind you, Kipling did write Britain’s favourite poem (according to a BBC poll) ‘If’ as a tribute to Leander Starr Jameson. Jameson led the eponymous Jameson Raid, a private military excursion into the Transvaal Boer Republic. This was a spectacularly catastrophic fiasco, and one of the events leading up to the Boer War. Kipling is believed to have written the poem for his young son John, as advice on navigating the complexities of life. On the outbreak of the Great War, father and son both saw this as a great opportunity for heroism in the name of the Empire. John, like his father, was very shortsighted and was rejected for combat. Rudyard was an active member of the War Propaganda Bureau, hugely influential in his own right and a personal friend of Lord Roberts, incidentally the successful British commander in chief in the Boer War. John was promptly commissioned into the Irish Guards. John arrived in the front line during the 1915 Battle of Loos. He had lost his identification disc. He was undoubtedly killed, but his body was not  identified until the 1990s.

Rudyard would not accept that John was dead rather than missing until 1919. The guilt he felt throughout the rest of his life is clearly seen in two bitter lines he wrote,

“If any question why we died,

Tell them, because our fathers lied.” Two lines, which, in their own way, are every bit as powerful as Wilfred Owen’s revered “Dulce et Decorum Est”, in which he gives the truth about the old lie that it is sweet and proper to die for your country.

As I said, there are quite a few Boer War Memorials throughout the country. I like this one, from Darlington and made this sketch of it in the Crawford and Black sketchbook:-

I really like this because it’s an ordinary soldier, not some walrus-moustached pompous stuffed shirt on horseback. Thank you Mr. Atkins.