"Austrian Kuirassier Mounts - Colours?" Topic

Dear All,

Please does anyone have any specific references or information about the colours of Austrian Kuirassier horses in 1809? I know that campaign turnout and regs are normally very different, but I understand the Austrians were very well provided by their remount service…

The Regiments I am interested in are:
1st Regt (Kaiser),
3rd Regt (Archduke Albert),
4th Regt (Crown Prince Archduke Ferdinand) and
6th Regt (Moritz Lichtenstein)

Thanks in advance!

Someone else may have more definitive information, but in case nobody else does – somewhere in the recesses of my brain, I'm fairly sure I asked Dave Hollins about this a few years ago, and that he told me something along the lines of "Yes, colours would be grouped within a regiment, but not as an arm-of-service." I took that to mean there was nothing like the "all-black" rule for some British heavies, and the elite companies of many French units.

Here are a couple of links; they repeat each other in places.

link

link

There was a widespread view in the 18th Century that darker horses were stronger, so you tended to get blacks and dark browns/bays used for cuirassiers and the like. I'm not sure if that lasted into the Napoleonic period or not.

In reading the first link above I was reminded of some features of horses and the impact that these had on the napoleonic wars. The article suggests that best curissaieur horses in 5-7 years old. In our age of the automobile, people haven't learned that horses take 6-7 years to fully develop their bones and joints. They are about 3 before their leg joins are developed enough to bear a rider for a short period and 5-6 before the spine is really able to bear the weight of a rider or a lot of heavy work. (Race horses develop earlier and are pushed to race at 2-3. Most of them develop serious problems and are crippled by 4-5).

Why is this important? The military requires large numbers of horses and wears them out quickly, by overwork, abuse, battle and often poor feeding. I wonder if you could chart the French run of success by their access to fresh sources of horseflesh as much as anything else? When they conquered a new area, they stripped it of horses and it takes 5+ years to generate a new crop. First France, then the low countries and nearby Italy. Then Austria, then Prussia, then Austria and Germany again. Finally, the invasion of Russia, scorched earth, and retreat from Moscow emptied the parts of Europe they controlled. Then Austria keep their own horses. Prussia became hostile and north German became occupied by the allies. Russia had the vast eastern plains and Ukraine to power their wagons and cavalry. France couldn't mount their cavalry and what they did was on inferior mounts. This topic could make a nice PhD thesis or book.

Us military historians think about rearmament and resupply with the modern timeframe of building a factory and ramping up its production. Think 2 years to get Willow Run to churning out B-24 bombers. Waiting 7 years for a cuirsassier horse was something Napoleon couldn't endure.

Thanks Super Max, appreciate the effort. Yes I guess any regulations would have been unearthed by now, so I'm guessing there were no Regimental distinctions along the lines of the Scots Greys or Queens Bays, or the blacks of the French Carabiners. I'm fed up with painting greys so will do as you advise and stick to blacks and duns! Cheers Mate!

Yes Bill the French definitely suffered from poorer horseflesh than the Allies in the Peninsula. Apart from the sourcing problems you mention, the French careless attitude to admin, logistics and discipline engendered by Napoloeon's 'live off the land' strategy led them to neglect and waste what horseflesh they did have. The sores on French horses could be smelt from miles away apparently, and on Waterloo eve the French Heavy Cavalrymen even slept in the saddle – can't have been good for the horse's wind!