When I was doing a photo recently of a group of Cherilea reissues I took a second look at the Cherilea Russians. The uniforms look wrong to me. Now I will be the first admit that I am no expert on uniforms. I leave that to other people, but still it does not look right to me. The figures look like grenadier uniforms. If I am correct it is odd as the other figures in the group of reissues British 8th Army and Chinese Communists uniforms look more realistic. What are your thoughts?
These Russian were definitely made by an artist and approved by other who did not have idea in the era uniform ,neither Russian army uniform ,pretty much not too far from many done by Cherilea ..
All were done apparently with intention to look some type of “Cossack infantry” Definitely they don’t wear the typical Circassian of the kuban cossack. But are dress more like Late czarist empire imperial guard Cossack (because of sided bottom uniform tunic/shirt and tide pants with high boots plus style of hat) . Which indeed the Soviet army never had any corp and actually Cossack uniform were not designed for/by the soviet army ,only the varies style hats were used with mix local design before 1941
Still during WW2 Cossack people fought alongside both Soviets and Germans most times using they traditional civil clothing or a mix and most integrated as regular soviet soldier using standard soviet uniform. The few units approved by Stalin wore a non traditional shirt very distinctive from these depicted on the figures and used from 1943/1945 only.
After WW2 during Staling late regime and after, not Cosssack was permit as military unit neither used as such in the Soviet army.
These figures don’t do not represent at all any of the WW2 , later soviet-Russian or any type uniform wore by Cossacks at that time,more like as mentioned before .Please see pictures attached in following links.
http://www.npr.org/2014/02/22/280964932/back-from-history-russias-cossacks-ride-as-patriots
http://russiapedia.rt.com/of-russian-origin/cossacks/
http://cossackweb.narod.ru/cossacks/kazww2.htm
And of course they don’t look like Russian soldiers too much in uniforms and weapons some of which are post WW2 western base design. I forgot mentioned..
The uniforms and weapons are WAY off. Too many things to list. You’d all get bored, anyhow. Due to nothing else being out there in comparable size, I use them as heavy weapons for my Timmee Russian Bn.
Crap.
I would never induct these terrible sculpts into my collection.
These figures seem similar to the Charbens Russians. I was given some recasts of these and they don’t really look like anything that I have seen with WWII Russians. I have classified them as exotic opponents of my Lido GI recasts. I suppose these figures show the power of stereotypes. Even the American-made MPC Russians had a couple of figures in Cossack hats. Here is a link to Toysoldierhq’s Charbens page:
http://www.angelfire.com/biz/toysoldierhq/Vintagebritish.html
Daniel
I agree the Charbens Russians fall into the same category as the Cherilea. I wonder why both companies did not do a little more research on the uniforms.
Agree.I think both cherilaea and charbens are both the last on toy soldier category in poses ,design ,accuracy in the British plastic toy soldier factories.
Even other figures as Germans and British paratroops are way wrong in many things on uniforms. The Russian charbens are actually worst that cherilea as the detail the odd uniform more with a combination of WW1-WW2 British weapons and modern post WW2 British/else weapons in a set of more poses. From charbens my most acceptable and only attract me are the pirates. From cherilea the knights-solid not swap.
Crescent Russian are much acceptable in uniform and weapons ,still very odd done in detail, but I will take them.
My cherilea Cossack Russian were converted in to imperial Russian soldiers artillery man for Crimea war, cutting all weapons, the bazooka men was converted too clubbing.
Yes I Wonder the same been from Britain where many are more pro historical in general these two toy companies no only release then but the person approving most have realize from the start it were wrong and no matter what went on with both.
I can understand why a collector might want examples for his collection, but again, never felt my collection (or armies) were incomplete without them.
I never really had a problem with the Cossack hats on the MPC figures because, overall, they weren’t bad figures (not Marx, but the only Russians in the scale I was aware of when I was a kid) and as a kid I wasn’t really THAT in to accuracy yet. But there were lines even then I drew – if every button wasn’t correct the figures at least had to “feel” right. To each his (or her) own, but I’ve never liked either Cherilea or Charbens figures (Jean Hoffler is another brand I’ve avoided for the most part) – I know they are TOY s0ldiers – but I’ve always felt these companies not only crossed the line but never knew where it was. JMO
You are right, I’d forgotten about them – they do resemble the Airfix figures a great deal.
https://ospreypublishing.com/catalogsearch/advanced/result/?name=The+Cossacks&description=&short_description=&sku=&price%5Bfrom%5D=&price%5Bto%5D=&author=&illustrator=&series=&short_code=&period=&imprint=&isbn_10=&order=publication_date&dir=desc
These figures were made during the border fighting with India in the late 1950s and they came out at the same time as the Sheikh Infantry ( called Hindoo by Cherilea in their sales lists!)
They were also the ‘baddies’ for any WW3 scenario
As with the Crescent Russian and Indian Army sets
They are generic Russian / Cossack Infantry, showing Wilf Cherrington’s Bren gun fixation, actually they cast metal weapons to add to the figures to save time, which is why their wild west series has what look like Lee Enfield rifles.
I cannot see why negative comment has been made about the sculpting – the anatomy is fairly good, the poses realistic and the facial detail on the defended and attacking figure is very well done.
As a child I loved these figures and they beat the crap out of my Germans in many a game, I never ever considered using them to fight NATO troops, as far as I was concerned they were WW2 Red Army.
As for Cherilea – yes they were TOY soldiers but as a company they showed a damn sight more imagination that the other UK major makers. Romans, Ancient Egyptians, Britons, Vikings, Elizabethans, ECW, 1745 Highlanders, Zulus, as well as the standard Knights,Wild West and WW2. I really did love and still love them
Peter
I can understand your love for the Cherilea figures as you grew up with them just as I grew up with various U.S. figures. They did an exciting range and I have been happy to collect them over the years. I have the Cleopatra box set which is one of the few figures on display in house.
I am sure the readers appreciate the information you havepassed along on this company.
My comments on the uniforms is looking back and wondering why the Russians were done in that type of uniform. They are from an era when we were just happy to get toy soldiers.
I agree they are after toys