"Cuirass, how effective? " Topic

I was woundering how effective a cuirass actually was. Is there a measurable difference in casualty levels or do you simply get fewer chest wounds but more missing limbs. If there is a difference, is it great enough to include on a wargames table?

Ive seen a real one with a bullet hole through it so.....

I've seen one where a cannonball went through. It's basically a safety margin. It'll stop the odd angled shot and a slash from a sword, but little else.

Didnt the German Stormtroopers of WW1 wear something similiar?

Earlier ones could be somewhat effective. A pistol shot was fired into them during the ECW to "proof" them.

I guess they would sometimes stop pistol and sword cuts but probably not many musket shots.

It was not actually that widely sued - the weight was the main problem. De Brack noted that the French Cuirassiers at Aspern were only able to move at a trot and they took very heavy casulties from Austrian fire. Austrian Kurassier only used the rear plate against the Turks and didn't deploy them to Italy, aside from one unit down there in 1799-1800, as the ground was bad. The plate offered no protection against cannonballs.

There is a myth from Alt-Egloffsheim 1809 that the French backplate enabled them to slaughter Austrian Kurassier - it was heard by Pelet around a campfire and popularised by Marbot. It might however offer some morale advantage.

I suspect the main difference it would make on our table is how much the wearer believed it was worth. Confident troops do better in close combat.

There's that old Marbot story trotted out from time to time about French Cuirassiers having it over Austrian Cuiarssiers because they had front and back plates while the Austrians had front only. The fight he's describing, Alt Eggolfsheim (excuse my spelling) was a fight where the French outnumbered the Austrians better than 3-2. Perhaps that says more about the fight than front and back plates.

I would think that a cuirass would be very effective in convincing the cavalry trooper that he was invincible, very similar to zulu juju. Flashman does not think that cavalry were very bright, but Allen may disagree.

Sharpe and Harper find them very effective ad hoc battlefield frying pans.

The comment about Austrian versus French cuirassiers is certainly an old chestnut that has done the rounds. Having said this, it would seem that a cuirass was probably of some use in head-to-head cavalry battles, but of minimal use against firearms and certainly not worth the weight difference against anything but smooth-bore muskets. Interestingly, many 17th century regiments billed as "cuirassiers" did not wear their armour in the field, suggesting they did the math and figured it was not worth trotting around on campaign. Now, many of those same regiments dusted off their armour for the 7YW and Napoleanic Wars, so either re-did the math or had more bloody-minded COs

I wore my cuirass to work today, and I have to say that I am at least 17% more effective than the other cubicle-dwellers who are not wearing armor. Plus I feel totally awesome. Some guy tried to take up more than his share of the seat on the train and in the voice of those accustomed to command I said: "Sirrah, kindly keep your billowing coat to yourself!" And he did, at once.

Just curious, but how much would a standard cuirass weigh?

How do you pronounce "cuirass" in English, anyway? We usually say something like "queer-ass"* in our group, but that just sounds so wrong.

A friend used to call "cuirassiers" "see RAHS ee yays", and it took us a while to figure out what he was talking about. We generally say "QUEER uh sayres", but Idunno.

*I bet you a dollar it gets bleeped.

Huh. I lose a dollar.

American Heritage Dictionary pronounces the riders as "kweer-Uh-SEER" and the armor as "kwee-RAS".

We say KUH-RAH-SEE-AYR

It shouldn't! John you made me laugh out loud when I was supposed to keep a straight face, so this message is worth staying as is....Queer-ass! Excellent.

Ioannis

By the way, that's how I pronounce it but never thought of it like that. Maybe a French wargamer could enlight us?

Curious. If the word Cuirass is a French word, then what did the Ancient Greeks and Romans call it? Oops sorry, wrong board methinks...

Ioannis - 'Maybe a French wargamer could enlight us?'

O.K., I'm not, stricto sensu, French, but I am bilingual.
PeteMurray's pronunciation is probably the closest to the French. The 'ui', would be a diphthong, however, which would be extremely difficult to pronounce in English whilst keeping the stress on the second syllable, especially considering thre isn't any English equivalent of the French 'u'. The 'r' should be hard, somewhat closer to the Scottish '-ch', as in 'loch', but not quite.

'Cuirassier' would be more chalenging. The stress would be kept on the second syllable, and you have a second diphthong with the '-ier'. It would sound something like '-eeyeah', but with an acute rather than grave 'e'.

petterthegreat - 'We say KUH-RAH-SEE-AYR'

Are you sure that isn't Curaçao?

WILL stop a bayonet thrust or saber slash.

MIGHT stop a musket ball but not a very close range.

WILL NOT stop a cannon ball at any range.

According to Osprey's Rossbach and Leuthen, a cuirass weighed 32 pounds. Can't recall if that was a Prussian or Austrian cuirass.

Seems like enough reason to leave them in the baggage wagon, especially when the weather's hot.

As was said earlier, a cuirass improved the cavalryman's confidence much more than that is offered protection in combat (while fighting, the chest area is one of the most difficult places to reach anyways - legs and arms would be much more likely to suffer injury) Just like with the rest of the flashy uniforms and especially headgear it was a way of making the trooper look and feel fearsome and dangerous. As morale is a very important factor in battle, the effect of a little plate of armour and a fancy hat cannot be underestimated.

The French Cuirass was stronger and heavier at the onset of the Napoleonic wars but by the end the quality had diminished like everything else. The Cuirass would reduce some sabre and bayonet wounds and a musket ball at long range, but not a cannon ball. The wearer would feel more superior and confident than most of his adversaries. In close quarter combat the cuirass could be an encumberance also weighing down horses and reducing speed and agility on the battlefield especially on soft ground.

Basically there are advantages and disadvantages to the Cuirass. The French had 12 regiments of Cuirassiers and 2 of carabiniers for most of the Napoleonic Wars so they must have thought it was worthwhile. The British however had no cuirass armed troops but then they had no Lancers. I suppose the same thoughts that apply to Cuirassiers apply to Lancers!

Hi

The romans and greeks had no word to correspond to "cuirass" that I am aware of. However, as most gamers, at best,have read a "Penguin" translation of some Roman or Greek work, they will see specific military terms in latin and greek replaiced with the generic word "cuirass".

I always assumed that "proper" literature doesn't worry about the military aspects.

Rocky

Interesting, I've always wondered what the correct pronunciation was but used Cure-ahs-ee-yeah.

Funny we used the Franophile pronunciation (ee-yeah) of 'ier' in Cuirassier but the anglified (eer) version when saying Grenadier.

[The romans and greeks had no word to correspond to "cuirass" that I am aware of.]

Isn't it -thorakites- (not sure of the inflection)? I recall that -thorakitai- are ostensibly troops protected by a cuirass.

I agree that the morale boost is probably the biggest effect, but don't rule out the protection from glancing shot and spent rounds, whether small arms or canister. If you've ever been hit by something approximating those (raise your hands), they can be quite disabling!

re: pronounciation - It was once my honor to play in an 1809 game with a GM whose notions of the French and German languages were inspired to say the least. Queer racers (there's an image), Chasers of the Guard, Jaggers, Hoosiers...it just went on and on. My personal favorite was that splendid hero of Austria, Frost Lightensteen.

Cuirassier = kweerasseeay. That is the correct French pronunciation as best I can render it without using phonetic transcription.

"Kur-rass-cee-eh"

Cuirasses were said to stop most bladed attacks short of a couched lance, may deflect/absorb a musket ball, but would not stop anything more.

Since the British never used cuirasses but did use grenades, the pronunciation would have been molded to the language.

Besides, who can say that the average British soldier didn't say cure-ah-seer when talking about the enemy?

I don't think the armour had much affect in combat but troops picked to be Cuirassiers were better riders, larger and more willing to fight, less likely to break than other French calvary. I'm under the impression the main difference was morale and not equipment.

PeteMurray, Careful-before long somebody'll be sticking refrigerator magneted notes on you. And then there's always the guy who insists on doing the drum riff from 'Wipeout' on your chest. If it's too polished you get folks in the elevator trying to surreptitiously use it as a mirror, etc.

Initially, after the order to armor the cavalerie regiments reduce their number to twelve, the cuirass was required to be 'proved' by three musket shots at thirty paces. There were too many rejects (as well as protests from the manufacturers) and eventually one musket round 'at long range' was used instead.

The cuirass was improved from 1804 until the 1812 model, and it was 'secure' against sword, lance, sabre, and bayonet. It was not secure against close range musket fire but might protect a man against a pistol shot. It definitely didn't help against artillery fire.

It took a strong man to wear it and it took some time to get used to it (today it still takes time to get used to wearing modern body armor).

Wearing a full cuirass did give the cavalryman an advantage against unarmored or partially armored troopers in a melee, and definitely in a pursuit. While Marbot might have exaggerated the loss ratio at Eckmuhl in 1809, there cannot be any doubt that a better armored horseman fighting sabre to sabre in a melee with one who isn't has an advantage. Pelet (one of Massena's ADCs) concurred with Marbot's analysis and he was on the field in command of an infantry unit.

"there cannot be any doubt that a better armored horseman fighting sabre to sabre in a melee with one who isn't has an advantage"

I'm not sure the British cavalry would agree with you. They weren't really impressed with the French cuirassiers at Waterloo. Of course, the cuirassiers at Waterloo reflected a lot of the decline in quality that was endemic to the French cavalry after 1812, so the Brits got something of a biased view.

Several regiments of Cuirassiers at Waterloo didn't have their Cuirasses at all..didn't have time to get equipped properly and according to Elting the Grenadiers a Cheval were going to be issued with them!

I thought that the Austrians wore both front and back plates AND broke out the old helmets when they went agaist the Turks?! To counter all their light cavalry was my understanding (From Duffy).

I recall reading about musket (or cannister?) balls bouncing off the French cuirassiers in a charge during the 1809 campaign. At Regensburg (sp?) I think was the place. The quote commented on the sound and (IIRC) implied that the balls were not penetrating the breastplates. Could be a complete fiction - it is from a book about the campaign that I am sure was published by the Emperor's Press. Sorry I can't confirm - it was a borrowed book and I can't even remember the title.

The backplate and lobster-tail helmet (looking like a New Model army helmet wer only employed against the Turks, but really only because of the sheer quantity of light Turkish cavalry who might sneak up on them or just get into a big melee.

"Pelet (one of Massena's ADCs) concurred with Marbot's analysis and he was on the field in command of an infantry unit." Well, that sums it up on Alt-Egloffsheim - as there were no infantry units present. It is another myuth invented by one Frenchman, copied by another and believed by those, who have not read the casualty figures in Krieg 1809 Vol.1.

What about the glare factor?

'Blind enemies (-2 combat factor) in melee/shooting if cuirassier facing within 45 degrees of the sun's direction if battle takes place between 0700hrs to 1000hrs or 1400hrs to 1700hrs, or if French cuirassiers fleeing from enemy units with their backs facing within 45 degrees of the sun's direction if battle takes place between 0700hrs to 1000hrs or 1400hrs to 1700hrs, except when enemies are wearing sunglasses and/or are blind, or if weather roll is overcast/raining/snowing/blizzard/tornadeo/typhoon, or if cuirassiers have neglected to polish their breastplates the night before due to a lack of Brasso.'

"Besides, who can say that the average British soldier didn't say cure-ah-seer when talking about the enemy?"

Aw, I'm sure the average British soldier was more creative and less polite when referring to a cuirassier. :)

So... if the cuirass slowed the cavalry, then the helmet worn by the Austrians infantry *must* be the reasons that they are depicted (in various Napoleoinc rules) as moving slower than most everyone else! ;-)

One cuirassier regiment was without cuirasses at Waterloo. The Grenadiers a Cheval were being converted into a cuirassier regiment by the Bourbons. Napoleon's return stopped that idea.

Many French cavalry commanders preferred to charge at the trot because of greater control. The French heavy cavalry at Eckmuhl charged at the trot because they had just completed a long march and the horses were tired. That's probably as fast as they could get them to go.

The carabiniers were put into helmet and cuirass after 1809 because of heavy losses.

The adoption of the cuirass and lance, and the conversion of four light cavalry regiments to lancers, after the Napoleonic Wars by the British is interesting. I wonder why they did that?

Perhaps the destruction of the Union Brigade at Waterloo by cuirassiers and French line lancers (commanded by Farine and Jacquinot, respectively) had something to do with it. Further, Pire's rampaging light cavalry at Quatre Bras was somewhat impressive as well as Kellermann's charge on the British center with one brigade (1,000 sabres) made an impression also.

The classical greek word for a breastplate was Thorax. However, I dont know if this means a breastpalte, or a breast-and back plate. No idea what the romans called it ( I have started learning greek, but wont start latin for 2 years ! )

I expect the shiny glint was a bit intimidating. Theyw ere however expensive - Napoleon criticised Jerome for having Garde du Corps in breastplates.

Kreoseus:

Learning Greek first and then Latin? When I studied classical languages, we did it the other way, Latin first and then Greek.

Machew, its through a distant study university ( open university, uk) so I can pick and choose what I do and when. Thought I might get the greek out of the way first ( and call all my friends barbarians, damn non-greek speakers !!)