"French carabiniers at Wagram were in bearskins, right?" Topic

I mean the heavy cavalry carabiniers.

thanks!

EDIT: Ugh… I apologize, answered my own question..
Yes, for those who search this later on. In 1809 the carabiner cavalry wore bearskins.

Correct, they were not yet currasiers.

Regards
Russ Dunaway

The Carabinier regiments never were cuirassiers, even though they were armored in helmet and full cuirass after 1810.

They were still carabiniers and were somewhat insulted to be referred to as cuirassiers, who to them were Johnny-come-latelies.

Although they still were called carabiniers they had curirass and helmet -- ????? The Curirass and helmet were different, but nonetheless a curirass and helmet. For the purpose of description, thats what they were. Indeed, they may not have liked it -- in fact thay hated the gaudy uniform --nonetheless-- for all purposes they became curirassiers. Call them what you want. They sure we're not lancers.

Regards
Russ Dunaway

When working on two Napoleonic computer games for the 1809 campaign back in 1999-2002 I learned that the Carabiniers did NOT wear a cuirass. It was not until they changed uniforms and headgear that they had the cuirass. I seem to remember it being LATE 1809, long after the Battle of Wagram and the end of the campaign in Austria.

Definitely NOT lancers. I am not sure if you would consider them "heavy" cavalry before the days before the cuirass. Depends on whether you go with the "big horse" theory or the "cuirass" theory.

Austrian Cuirassiers only had the plate in front. Some consider them Light or Medium cavalry if hit from the rear or flank.

Again its up to your own interpretation of what "Heavy" cavalry means. Some consider cavalry with the straight sword AND cuirass AND big horse to be considered "Heavy" cavalry. As usual a lot of difference of opinion when it comes to Napoleonics ;)

Yes, the earlier Carabiner did not have the curirass, wore the bearskin, and to a rank amateur could be confused with the Grenadier a Cheval of the guard.
The sarcasm concerning the lancers was to make a point, give any mounted figure a Lance, call them what you will, but they would still be "lancers!"

Regards
Russ Dunaway

No, that isn't correct. Sorry. To call them cuirassiers after they were armored just isn't accurate.

And the carabiniers were always heavy cavalry, armored or not.

The Grenadiers a Cheval of the Imperial Guard were heavy cavalry, as were the Dragoons of the Imperial Guard.

I think Austrian heavy cavalry is also heavy regardless of which flank it's facing.

Simply semantics. They were men on horses who wore a curirass and a helmet and we're called Carabiners.
Sorry, they had a curirass, they had a helmet, they functioned as curirassiers.
Regards
Russ Dunaeay

1809 – bearskin caps, still dark blue coat with red facings, they already then did function a shock cavalry.

Ok- excellent. The 1st heavy cavalry division that the carabiniers belonged to was a very impressive unit. Each division had 16 squadrons of cuirassiers but the first ALSO had 8 squadrons of carabiniers, for 24 total squadrons.

I just painted and based up the entire cavalry reserve at Wagram, minus the carabiniers, and its already a very large body of cavalry. 48 squadrons plus the eight carabiniers. 480 figures. It took me about four hours or so, with my new mass-painting techniques I've been using.

Even in 3mm it is a very impressive looking formation. I need to order up some guard horse cavalry from Pico Armor tomorrow so I can finish up the unit. It represents a little under 1/3 of the total cavalry at the battle. According to my calculations I need about 1400 cavalry figures to do the entire thing. I have pretty much all of the bags I need, minus the carabiniers.

@Old Glory: sorry, not simply semantics.

Whether they had a cuirass and helmet, or bearskin and jacket, the Carabiniers were heavy cavalry and used in precisely the same role as cuirassiers.

The concept of 'given a horseman a lance and he's a lancer' is noted, but we are talking about a couple of elite units of the French army. Anyone who called them 'cuirassiers' to their face would doubtless have been minus a few teeth.

Being a 'Carabinier' was a matter of great importance and pride to them. Unit pride / esprite d'corps whatever you want to call it, is VERY important, and to try to dismiss a uniform trait as 'mere semantics' is to have entirely the wrong end of the problem that was faced by Napoleon.

In part, this is why the Carabiniers were mollified (for want of a better term) by getting copper plated cuirass, and a different helmet type.

The fact that Napoleon was prepared to go to this additional expense rather than simply insisting that they be armored in the standard helmet / cuirass needs to be considered…

The whole point of the copper colored cuirass and new white jackets was precisely so that the Carabiniers could NOT be confused with 'mere' Cuirassiers whether wearing armor or not.

Some hussar units were armed with lances in 1813-1814, but they were still hussar units…

Being given a lance does not make you a lancer. Being trained to use a lance and then being able to use it effectively makes you a lancer!

Just think, if Russ had originally said in his first post something along the lines of 'yes, they were not yet wearing the later uniform that looked similar to the cuirassiers', none of the rest of this thread would have happened…

@Cerdic +1

You are all talking about a name and title given to these units – – they are still essentially cuiraisers IMHO, regardless of what they thought of themselves. You may consider them elite or whatever -- this does not negate the fact that when you desribe them at this time period it is demanded you mention a curirass and helmet. In 1809 they could be referred to as heavy calvary just as a line dragoons-- different titles and status -- still heavy calvary.
The Old Guard, regardless of their title or status were still infantry just like their brethren in the line regiments. In world War 2 -- Tiger, Sherman, Stuart, T38, all different names,reputations,status --- still all called tanks.
The word "Cuirassier" former anyway is more of a description then a name
Either way, the OPS question was answered and I agree also with Ceridiculous = +6

Regards
Russ Dunaway

You should remember that everyone is entitled to their opinion; they are not entitled to their own facts.

And the carabiniers were heavy cavalry before and after they were armored.

And cuirassier was a type of heavy cavalry, not merely a description, and in the French service they were elite heavy cavalry.

Surely the distinction relates to their intended purpose.

Heavy Cavalry were meant to be the shock troops for the battlefield. To smash into organised units using sheer brute strength….and it did work many a time….but not on 18th June….well, not for the French anyway….except when it did of course, outside LHS for example….

Light cavalry were for recce, preventing enemy recce, by guarding one's flanks, pursuing a beaten enemy, attacking enemy's or protecting one's own lines of Communication. Now whether they had fore and aft cuirasses, or indeed lances, no matter…… how they were used was what mattered. Not what they were called.

Oh……..Except for Dragoons in French service. Ah, much discussion last few weeks… here.

It did seem so simple…..

When working on two Napoleonic computer games for the 1809 campaign back in 1999-2002 I learned that the Carabiniers did NOT wear a cuirass. It was not until they changed uniforms and headgear that they had the cuirass. I seem to remember it being LATE 1809, long after the Battle of Wagram and the end of the campaign in Austria.

HappyHussar:

Love to know your source for that. The Carabiniers led the cuirassier division in most cases, so it may not have 'acted' just like a cuirassier unit, particularly if it weren't armored until late or after 1809. By this time, most cuirassier divisions had light cavalry attached to it. Perhaps they were called Carabiniers for a reason.

The cuirassier division arrived, with the brigade of Carabiniers at its head. The Emperor deployed it straight away, for he saw that the Austrian cavalry, in columns in front of the Ratisbon, had begun to advance towards us.
Soon an uhlan regiment in six squadrons trotted up to with in 200 paces of the Carabiniers and launched a charge at full tilt. It reached their line, but could not break it, as the second regiment of Carabiniers was right behind the first, and behind it the rest of the cuirassier division. I saw a great many Carabiniers with lance woulds, but a dozen or so uhlans had also fallen.

April 20th, 1809 Dezyery Chlapowski, Memoirs of a Polish Lancer p.60

Hard to believe that the Carabiniers would be sent forward without armor to simply stand and take the charge. I know of several examples of cairassiers doing that.

Indeed, and the obvious fact is, regardless of the name given them for identification purposes they were cuirassiers--to deny this is to deny reality.

Regards
Russ Dunaway

No, they were Carabiniers. :-)

And that is historic fact.

Just a name --not a function.
Just because they were named carabiniers does not negate the fact that they were effectively cuirassiers.

Regards
Russ Dunaway

Just a name --not a function.
Just because they were named carabiniers does not negate the fact that they were effectively cuirassiers.

So why 1. the different name, 2. different uniform until late 1809 and 3. Always leading Cuirassier divisions?

Why are you so a fixed to the name ?? A Legre was still an infantryman with a different name and although he theoretically could skirmish, the French line was suppose to be able to do that also -- all still infantry with different names and uniforms.
After 1809 the carbiniers were curirassiers that were called Carabiniers -- same function different looking cuirassiers, but still cuirassiers, brigaded with cuirassiers, by the way, all cuirassier were considered "elite", thus the plume and no elite companies.
I am certainly not debating the fact that there were two units who were historically referred to as carabiniers in the French army-- however, up to 1809 they were not cuirassiers, after 1809 the very description of these units would describe a cuirassier. The word cuirassier, for me anyway is not a name, it is a description.
Take the curirass and helmet away from any currasiers regiment, even keep calling them currasiers, but in reality they are no longer currasiers.
Once again I ask -- forget the name-- if a man is wearing a CUIRASS AND A HELMET --- a "CUIRASS"-- SAY "CUIRASS" -- regardless of the official name and title he is a cuirassier by definition.
A navy Seal is still officially a sailor.
Just going in circles now since I'm done.

Best regards
Russ Dunaway

For what it's worth- I would venture to suggest that Brechtel and Old Glory are both correct.

In the French Napoleonic army, and later- the Cuirassiers (big 'C') were a specific category of mounted regiment in the army list. The regiments of Carabiniers were never part of this category- no doubt about that.

However, as we all know cuirassier (small 'c'), was also- before, during and after the Napoleonic wars- the generic term for a mounted soldier equipped in a particular way- ie wearing a cuirass. Napoleon's regiments of Carabiniers after 1810 were cuirassiers in that sense- no doubt about that.

In fact, during the c18th- the Carabiniers of the French Royal army- whenever they could be bothered to wear the cuirasses with which they were issued, were also cuirassiers.

As has been pointed out- in other armies at various times- many regiments of Cuirassiers were not actually cuirassiers.

@seneffe: well said.

I suspect that Napoleons dictum that 'moral to physical is 3 as to 1' is what is actually under discussion at this point.

Old Glory clearly believes that the physical is the overriding factor in the naming process, while Brechtel is looking towards army lists, unit history, and the morale side of the equation.

Everyone is, of course, entitled to their point of view. But the insistence of the French in continuing to refer to Carabiniers, or indeed the Prussians and Russians to continue to refer to unarmored cavalry as 'Cuirassiers', or indeed the US Navy insistence on referring to 'Navy Seal', indicates that the milataries of the world are on Napoleons side in this debate.

The Prussian "cuirassiers" did not wear the cuirass through the majority of the Napoleonic campaigns-- no matter what they are called on an OB I do not consider them "cuirassiers" -- just simply heavy cavalry -- exactly what the carabiniers were before being issued cuirass and helmet. Up to 1809 the French carabiniers would, to the amateur not appear that different then Napoleons "Gods."
Webster = "a mounted soldier wearing a cuirass."

Regards
Russ Dunaway

Russ, You are correct. The Carabiniers after 1809 can be considered cuirassiers.

Stephen

Neither cuirassiers, carabiniers, currasiers, nor curirasiers are correctly named since the word "cuirass" derives from the French word cuir (pronounced "queer") which means "leather".

A cuirass was a boiled leather chestplate. As no Napoleonic unit wore leather armour, it is clear that all so-called cuirassier units were frauds.

The Carabiniers after 1809 can be considered cuirassiers.

Source?

And by whom?

'Cuir' does indeed translate to 'leather.'

'Cuirass' however, translates as armor-plated.

French military terms may have both a civilian and a military meaning.

I now cannot wait for

Leathered: The Truth About Napoleon's Fake Warriors (A. Hack, 2017)

to appear in my Christmas stocking.

:-)

carabiniers à cheval in 1809

bearskin caps
blue coat

heavy cavalry

they are definately no cuirassiers in 1809

also see the usual miniatures offered, there will be a difference in early and "late" carabiniers.

"Leathered: The Truth About Napoleon's Fake Warriors (A. Hack, 2017)"

Haha. That explains why all the museum examples have bullet holes in them.

Why are you so a fixed to the name ?? A Legre was still an infantryman with a different name and although he theoretically could skirmish, the French line was suppose to be able to do that also -- all still infantry with different names and uniforms.

Old Glory:

All cavalry could skirmish too, right? So, why light cavalry, or even the name?

Names meant something about the unit purpose, their role in battle and campaign…they were named differently for a reason. The legere ALWAYS were the first to skirmish if present and the line supported them. The Carabiniers seem to have always led the Cuirassier division they were brigaded with, at least through 1809…

After 1809 the carbiniers were curirassiers that were called Carabiniers -- same function different looking cuirassiers, but still cuirassiers, brigaded with cuirassiers, by the way, all cuirassier were considered "elite", thus the plume and no elite companies.

Quite possible. They were brigaded with curaissiers in 1809 and before without a cuirass. Light cavalry was assigned to cuirassier divisions too. So?

Why should the metal breast plate have more significance than the name? Legere were brigaded with ligne infantry.

Those facts don't explain the Carabiniers' name or how that unit was used…

Either way, the GLORIOUS CARBINIERS did not preform all that well in 1813 against Austrian hussars's (poor General Sebastiani) and 1814 again against the heavy cavalry Russian cossacks???? 🤔

Regards
Russ Dunaway

Wow! What a debate. Forgive me my ignorance, but I had always thought the names of unts often indicated their original specialist function, a source of pride, rather than necessarily a current function. So, fusiliers, grenadiers, carabiniers, even dragoons and chevauxlegers, referred to their original weaponry or function, or relation to other troops types. In the 18th century the bulk of the French cavalry were called 'chevauxlegers' but were not llight cavalry by any contemporary standards, the name originated to distinguish them from the fully armoured 'gens d'armes' in the 16th century. Is this not correct? Would anyone argue grenadiers in 1815 were still equipped with grenades, or fusiliers with fusiils? So why this debate about Carabiniers? I had assumed they traced their lineage to the Carabiniers du Roi, a large and distinguished regiment which, I understood, traced its origins back to Louis XIV. Does anyone argue they had a unique function in the Napoleonic Wars which distinguished them from other heavy cavalry? And if so, what was it?

Yours puzzled,

Mollinary

Does anyone argue they had a unique function in the Napoleonic Wars which distinguished them from other heavy cavalry? And if so, what was it?

Mollinary:

Blame me. I was noting something unique about how Carabiniers were used: They led the Cuirassier division they were in when they didn't wear a cuirass. The Carabiniers were not dressed or armed [they carried carbines/carabiniers, get it?] like the Cuirassiers.

Carabinier uniforms

1st Cuirassiers 1809

So I am suggesting that there were differences for a reason.

So, fusiliers, grenadiers, carabiniers, even dragoons and chevauxlegers, referred to their original weaponry or function, or relation to other troops types.

Regardless of their original meanings [Grenadiers threw grenades] Are you suggesting those terms had no specific meaning referring to their function and type during the Napoleonic wars?

The poor OP --- I must apologize to him as it seems his simply question has became "guite the isssue" all because I referred to a cavalry man on a horse wearing a "cuiarass" as a "cuirassier?" And we do wonder why younger gamers may not be interested in the wonderful period we refer to as "Napoleonic" -- or dare I ask if this is correct without running the risk of of being "decalred" mistaken?
I guess a "machine gunner" can not be simultaneously called "heavy weapons?"

With total humor
Russ Dunaway

From Napoleon's Carabiniers by Ron Pawly, p.15

"Despite the glamour of the new uniform, the proudly elitist Carabiniers were initially unhappy at the idea of losing their traditional blue and red, let alone acquiring the trouble and burden of a cuirass. The armour was thought to be a sign that they were to have the same status as the Cuirassiers, which was anathema to them; but nothing could alter Napoleon's decision and, given time, they became reconciled to the change. Impatient to receive the new uniforms, Lt d'Algay wrote to his parents on 28 March 2011 that the cuirasses and helmets had gradually started to arrive. 'It will make a fine constume,' wrote one NCO. 'Monsieur Nansouty, our general – or rather the father of our division – has promised us we shall be elite cuirassiers.'"

Stephen

The poor OP --- I must apologize to him as it seems his simply question has became "guite the issue"…
***

Don't worry, the OP is entertained. :)

This reminds me that Ineed to order those Horse Grenadier figures from O8.
Question is, if the online store code says "Horse Grenadiers" is it proper to use them to represent carabiners EVEN IF the figures are too small to tell the difference?

The Carabiniers were not dressed or armed [they carried carbines/carabiniers, get it?] like the Cuirassiers.

I don't think there was any difference in the way they were armed. Cuirassiers carried carbines as well (from 1812 on). Or at least they were meant to. They might have tried to avoid it but carbines were supposed to be part of their kit.

And according to Napolun.com the Carabiniers didn't carry carbines until 1812; prior to that they were issued with dragoon muskets: link

I don't think there was any difference in the way they were armed. Cuirassiers carried carbines as well (from 1812 on). Or at least they were meant to. They might have tried to avoid it but carbines were supposed to be part of their kit.

SJD:
Perhaps, but we were discussing 1809 and before. The Cuirassiers didn't then. They did up until 1802. After all, we are talking about 20 years of war. Things do change for various reasons.

And according to Napolun.com the Carabiniers didn't carry carbines until 1812; prior to that they were issued with dragoon muskets: link

Well, if true, then they were armed like dragoons in 1809. Were they expected to carry out the same duties as dragoons? It could explain why the cuirassier divisions without Carabiniers had light cavalry assigned to them.

Question is, if the online store code says "Horse Grenadiers" is it proper to use them to represent carabiners EVEN IF the figures are too small to tell the difference?

forwardmarchstudios:
I would think so. Same uniform for the most part, same equipment.

!

Question is, if the online store code says "Horse Grenadiers" is it proper to use them to represent carabiners EVEN IF the figures are too small to tell the difference?

If they have Elite Dragoons, this would be a better choice to paint up as early Carabinier.

Pico Armor doesn't make elite dragoons… although they do make hussars in Busbys.

Haha, it's been so long since I painted anything larger than 3mm that I forgot that dragoons had elite companies with bearskins. I'll bear that in mind if I ever do some 1:1 dragoon regiments!

Maybe we have got all this the wrong way round. Since the cuirassiers were issued with carbines (in 1812?) they were in fact carabiniers and from that point on there were no cuirassiers in the French army. Discuss.

SJ you are a bad bad man :)

Surely we need to know how many cuirassiers and how many carabiniers there historically were per stand.

Does de Brack or maybe Marbot say anything on this?

How many stands did Napoleon stipulate?