"Green uniform of the French Light Infantry 1814" Topic

vW
Very interesting objects you bring to point.
I had no knowledge (nor could I) that the 'common' TirduPo uniform is based on a post-Napoleonic one.

I think its parameters fall in line with the changing dress of the army of the period (I model), and didn't seem unusual as a defined 'non-line' (numbered) special unit. However, if you can provide the description of what is covered by " c1807 describes them dressed in the usual light infantry uniform" that would be very helpful.

Secondly, I wholeheartedly agree with your comment on the other 'special' unit- the Emperors Cousins or TirCorse- that a battle unit in training for 2 years and 3 military campaigns would suddenly be re-dressed from 'standard legere with apple green facings' to the brown cloth of the known "Corsican National Guard" battalions.

Why Bucquoy and others accepted and published such a modification defies my thinking. It can only be an error on someones part, not understanding the true organisation and separation of the Corsican based 'militia' and the battle worn Tir. Corse.

And likewise, having recently scoured for better information on the Grenadiers ĺ Cheval* the white bearskin. I'm willing to accept they existed at least at the 'Paris parade dress' level and stayed in depot, as for every other guard cav unit.

Also the fact that many secondary plates (and on models) show cords slung across the front of the bearskin by officers and troop, like most infantry cords.

There were apparently not- having much shorter aurore plaited cords and racquettes, that flowed from top tassel fixed at the patch, behind and dropping below the plume, where unlike others there were also fixed in place. On the right the cords with racquettes hung straight down also, tho apparently not fixed down like those on the left.

*The same 'cords and racquettes' issue exists for the Gendarms d'elite.

As I say, interesting issues, and I'm certainly liking the forensic evaluations. (The issue of Dempsey also appears under the 'white uniform' discussion).
Regards
davew

When the trumpeters of the Chasseurs ŕ Cheval had a white busby for parade, it's not illogical to assume that those of the Grenadiers ŕ Cheval had them too. And once suggested it seams so self-evident that the suggestion could become excepted wisdom.
However the Trumpeters of the Grenadiers ŕ Cheval wore a cocked hat on parade, so they had no need for white bearskins.

DrsRob
Absolutely agree- I didn't stress that I was conjecturing the alternate hypothesis.
regards d

The 'jury' is divided on the subject of white bearskins for the trumpeters of the Grenadiers a Cheval.

Rousselot and Leliepvre say no; Malibran, Vanson, Knotel say yes.

So what we need is a multi-disciplinary approach…

So what different types of 'discipline' are needed?

Uniformology is the study of uniforms, and for this period the source material is rich and has to be taken for what each one is worth.

Seems to me the exercise here is degenerating into semantics, not the study of uniforms and source material.

However the Trumpeters of the Grenadiers ŕ Cheval wore a cocked hat on parade, so they had no need for white bearskins.

Exactly, moreover due to multiple disciple approach this is confirmed by the records as well, but you will see how people will insist of white bearskin caps due to the overawed Detaille or the fantasy that Herbert Knötel paints.

It is at least rewarding to see that newer researchers such as Rousselot, Courcelle, Leliepvre, Petard are not falling into the white bearskin cap trap so well entrenched and beloved by superficial researchers – who just copy the copy of the copy.

The 'jury' is divided on the subject of white bearskins for the trumpeters of the Grenadiers a Cheval.

Depends on who picks the jury.

So what different types of 'discipline' are needed?

Archival research; contemporary print (originals, not copies) the paintings on which these prints are based, if any, memoires and travel books, extant original pieces in musea and other collections, paintings and portrait paintings etc.
Art experts could help in dating paintings prints etc. by style, technique etc. independent from content. Textile expert could do the same for clothing etc.

Uniformology is the study of uniforms, and for this period the source material is rich and has to be taken for what each one is worth.

Actually, when we concentrate on contemporary prints, the source material is not that rich. And for what it's worth: isn't that what research should determine?

On the subject of the white bearskins, from our old friend John Cook:

'In order to corroborate white bearskins for the Grenadiers a Cheval trumpeters it is necessary to identify primary sources. As far as I know the evidence for black is primary whilst that for white is secondary and even further removed. Furthermore, the original secondary source for white bearskins has been identified by Rousselot and is suspect.
The contemporary (primary) evidence is exclusively iconographical. Two images, one in gouache by the anoymous artist of the so-called Otto Manuscript which depicts a trumpeter on campaign circa 1807, the other by Nicolaus Hoffmann (1740-1832), also in gouache, is of the regiment on parade circa 1805. Of the Otto artist we know nothing and some of his somewhat amateur and naive work displays inexplicable curiosities which are unique to him, although his depiction of detail, such as saddlery and so on, is accurate enough and where he he departs from the norm it is, sometimes, corroborated by other primary sources. For a complete assessment of this material see Guy Dempsey's ‘Napoleon's Soldiers'.
Hoffman on the other hand is a relatively open book. He was a professional painter and illustrator of military costume of great skill and attention to detail who was commissioned by the Landgrave of Hesse to illustrate the uniforms of the French army and worked in Paris between 1775 and 1808.
When considering secondary sources such as Knötel, Rousselot and so on, they stand or fall on their provenance. So what is it?
Lucien Rousselot was an official painter to the French army who had constant and regular access to archival material. He discusses the issue of white bearskins at length and states that the clothing returns from 1 Jan 08 to 11 May 14 only mention bicornes for trumpeters full dress. All his work is based on primary material the provenance for which is entirely transparent in the text to his series of plates. The rationale for rejecting his work in favour of Herbert Knötel who gives no corroborating evidence is bizarre.
Furthermore, Rousselot traces the source of the first mention of a white bearskin to a mid-19th Century work published in Paris, Costumes Militaires française depuis 1789 jusqu'ŕ 1814 etc, by Jospeh de Noirmont and Alfred de Marbot. In this work the Grenadiers ŕ Cheval trumpeter is illustrated and described with a white bearskin, the provenance for which is the gouache painting by Hoffman. The difficulty with this is that Hoffman shows black bearskins and not white. Quite why they chose to alter what their primary source depicted is unclear.
What do other reputable secondary sources and iconography tell us?
Richard Knötel in his Uniformenkunde published between 1890 and 1912 mentions the white bearskin in de Marbot and de Noirmont, but chooses to depict the trumpeters in bicornes. Richard Knötel's work is sometimes roblematical insofar as his sources are varied, not always primary and sometimes not given at all.
Fallou in his ‘La Garde Imperial' published in 1901 says white bearskins but Malibran's ‘Guide a l'usage des artistes et des constumiers', which describes French army uniforms from 1780 to 1848, and was also written in the early 20th Century, discusses some of the contradictions of Fallou's work and others, follows Fallou and says white bearskins but uniquely for parade only, and that black were worn on service. We now come to Herbert Knötel and encounter the same problem of sourcing which is opaque. Herbert Knötel worked either side of the Second World War and is also famous for his series of cigarette cards on German uniforms, Sturm-Zigarettenbilder-Alben – Deutsche Uniformen.
It is evident from his work for John Elting that he did not work exclusively from primary sources, though he may have used some; we just do not know. In summary, at the moment it appears that the first mention of white bearskins is in de Noirmont and de Marbot, who we know were not faithful to their source for reasons that are unclear. As all secondary sources which describe a white bearskin post-date this work we cannot be sure that they did not use it as, unfortunately, none of them give their provenance. Furthermore, the most recent research on the subject is Rousselot's.
Detaille is a different issue. Although he had a vast collection of military uniforms and artifacts he was a romantic military artist without peer, and not a documenter of uniforms. He is also a secondary source like all the others for which provenance is similarly unclear in the context of this issue specifically.
Finally, Eugene Liliepvre who is a painter to the French army corrects Detaille's famous depiction of the regiment in 1807 and his watercolour of the same scene has trumpeters in black bearskins. It is worth mentioning that the Otto artist who depicts the regiment en route to Poland in 1807 also seems to contradict Detaille.
On the other hand, if primary evidence of this ‘garment' is produced I would happily accept it.'

Well similar to the "curate cloth" of the Peninsula War, when the material ran out or ran low they did with what they could find. So blue dye ran low too we must assume.

There were dragoon and other regiments that fought in France that were wearing non-regulation uniforms under the very nose of Napoleon. I am thinking he must have not liked it but considering the way that a brand new army had to be built after the 1812 debacle "one does what one can." ;)

in case you don't ignore overwhelming primary source material, as well as archival research – the jury is clear – no white bearskin caps for Granadiers ŕ Cheval trumpeters.

John Cook made a good summary on this.

The rest is fantasy – and one clearly see the pitfalls relying without critical evaluation of multiple sources – it leads into a cul de sac.

It is interesting that General Vanson and his uniform work isn't mentioned in the above article. If I remember correctly. I brought that up when that article was originally posted with little or no response.

General Vanson did archival work with uniforms of the Grande Armee.

Did General Vanson find independent evidence about the existence of the white bearskin? Otherwise the matter of the inclusion of his work in the article would be academic.

I'll have to check. I did some years ago and his work, at least some of it is included in the older La Sabretache from 1893 to around 1900. I have the older volumes so I'll have to go through them and it will take awhile as the volumes are quite thick.

Rousselot certainly did a better research than Vanson, also see John Cooks analysis and then one knows how the white beasrkin cap became an entrenched myth.

And don't forget that in a given year a uniformologist might describe or paint an incorrect uniform due to lack of information, without having the chance or time to correct his mistake when he gets access to better information a few years later. It is rare that in historical research the final stage of having accessed all surviving sources can be reached.

Probably, if Herbert Knötel or Vanson or whoever had seen the evidence of Rousselot, they would have changed their opinion about the white bearskin. Or, if Vanson gives clear evidence from documents found in the archives and this material was unknown to Rousselot, surely the latter would have changed his opinion, had he known it.

And that is "Uniformology's" not so secret dirty secret. It has a tendancy to feed off itself.

There were very few contemporary uniformologists, just as there are not today (and even then they make mistakes, even when those of us that wore the uniforms are still alive and kicking, and in the era of the camera!). What there were were sellers of prints. In our period they did so not out of a meticulous sense of duty to history, but rather because military subjects sold well, which was surely the point. A glance at some of the surviving prints from the occupation of paris reveals costumes that surely never graced any soldier. The rendering of exotics, such as bagpipes, would be completely unplayable.

Remember where the phras artistic license comes from?

Portraiture, such as miniatures, often give a tantilising head and shoulders view. It has the added advantage is that it was often done for the officer themselves, so should at least be reasonably accurate.

Textiles are incredibly fragile, and dyes notoriously so. If it wasn't for the archives giving sealed patterns or samples or cloth and garment holdings being recorded, it would still be most unreliable.

So @Brechtel198 what do I mean by "Multi-disciplinary"?

Archivist, Archeologist, Armourer, Bibliographer, Conservater, Curator, Chromatographer, Data Analyst, Dendochronologist, Equine Specialist, Farrier, Furrier, Geophysicist, Historian, Hoplologist, Iconographer, Jacquard Loom Weaver, Ktenologist, Lithographer, Lexicographer, Leather Worker, Maitrise, Numismatist, Materials Technologist, Musicologist, Metalurgist, Milliner, Onomasiologist, Portraitist, Pyrobologist, Quantitive Analyst, Rhochrematicist, Saddler, Stratographist, Textile Engineer, Tailor, Vexillologist, Xylologist and Zoologist (for mascots)

To a varying degree, they would all have something to bring I think?

Just a question about period portraits. They are first-hand accounts of the uniforms from that period, but should we treat them as 100% accurate? I know some paintings had awards later added on that were awarded later in the officer's career.

One has to carefully scrutinize period portraits too. Not only for details added later, such as orders and decorations and for badges of higher rank.
Also apparently period portraits were sometimes painted (much) later, making them unreliable in general, not just in detail.
For instance, there are several paintings of Belgian officers, who had served in the 1814 Legion Belge and 1814/1815 Dutch raised units. Some of these show mixtures of uniforms from several periods.

There is a portrait of Baron Melchior Henri Ferdinand de Blochausen, an officer who had briefly served in the Belgian Hussars in or around October 1814. He was painted in its uniform in 1840(!). The uniform is largely the september 1814 uniform designed by Lieutenant-General Evers. At several points his equipment sports a monogram of the letters LB interlaced. This indicated "Legion Belge" and would only have been worn on the previous uniform, at a time when he did not serve with the regiment. On his shako, below the crowned W there is a number 8. The regiment received this number only in 1815, when the officer had long since transferred to the infantry. The rest of the details of his uniform cannot therefore be taken at face value.

Another example: a portrait in the Brussels Royal Army Museum of an officer of artillery in the uniform of the Legion Belge: green and crimson. His shako is however largely that of a Dutch gunner with a black plume and scarlet pompon and crown over crossed cannon device. His sword knot is also scarlet. The cross canon device of the Dutch Horse Artillery was first prescribed in 1815 and first issued in 1816. On the shako there also is displayed below the cross canon device a number one. The Legion unit was known as the 1st Artillery Regiment. The Dutch Horse Artillery never had a regimental number. When the Belgian companies were incorporated they became the 7th and 8th Company, so even a company number is out of the question.

In such cases details might very well be correct, but the whole ensemble is extremely suspect.

Is that this picture?

link

Yep, that's the one.

As you may know, I'm a British uniform fan. In studying that branch I find many a contradiction with modern artists interpretations which is mainly due to the fact that most had/have relied too heavily on the de Bosset and Hamilton-Smith contemporary record schematics, which though a good source, are none-the-less not flawless with Hamilton-Smith copying over the mistakes of de Bosset.

The thing about the period is that we have thousands of contemporary British military miniature portraits, treasured by loved-ones of the person depicted showing what officers (and some rare NCO depictions) of the day wore which in itself, gives a very good record of the regulation dress of a given regiment.

People on this site had come to the conclusion that all Buff-faced Regiments wore buff leather belts and britches but this 'may' not be the case.

These assumptions say…

…That the 30th button spacing was 'even'

The 58th was 'even'

The 70th was 'even'

The 74th was 'even'

The 78th was 'even'

The 98th was 'even' and braid 'Silver'

All the above (and there could be more) may be wrong as shown in said contemporary miniatures.

Studying uniforms of the period of all the combatants is a very frustrating and contradictory hobby. Even with today's access to information, we are still very, very short of the mark pertaining who wore what and when between 1790 to 1820.

PS. I have also come to the conclusion that the 95th at least, did not wear the bugle-horn cap badge in the field. I have seen many contemporary pictures of both Militia and 95th Rifle regiment personnel depicted which leads me to this.

An earlier portrait of the man you mentioned.

Major Melchior-Henri-Ferdinand de Blochausen 5th Belgian Line

Are these the paintings you are referring to?

sous-lieutenant Bernard Charles van der Burch

Colonel Willem-François Boreel Dutch 6e Hussars

Walveren Elias Johan van Balveren 6e Dutch Hussars

Colonel J.B. de Bruijn 2e Belgian Carabiners 1815

No, none of the above. I don't think I ever saw a photo on the net.

‌Salembier, Jean Pierre (possibly)
It's in the Royal Army Museum, Brussels.

Here you go! I've made it a bit clearer.

A fine picture too :)

It is at least rewarding to see that newer researchers such as Rousselot, Courcelle, Leliepvre, Petard are not falling into the white bearskin cap trap so well entrenched and beloved by superficial researchers – who just copy the copy of the copy.

And who knows but they also followed what they believed to be true regarding uniforms that had previously been researched and merely followed that line?

Of course if you take the stance that anybody can be wrong, you can pick what you like best and stick with it.

As far as Rousselot is concerned: an excerp from the article by John Cook, quoted by Allan F Mountford above:

Lucien Rousselot … had constant and regular access to archival material. He discusses the issue of white bearskins at length and states that the clothing returns from 1 Jan 08 to 11 May 14 only mention bicornes for trumpeters full dress. All his work is based on primary material the provenance for which is entirely transparent in the text to his series of plates. The rationale for rejecting his work in favour of Herbert Knötel who gives no corroborating evidence is bizarre.

It's clear from this that on the subject of the white bearskin he did not simply follow someone else.

I'd like to react in more detail to the remark made by Brechtel198:

It is interesting that General Vanson and his uniform work isn't mentioned in the above article. If I remember correctly. I brought that up when that article was originally posted with little or no response.

General Vanson did archival work with uniforms of the Grande Armee.

From another topic I quote you:

I would suggest the work of French General Vanson. It can be found in the old editions of La Sabretache. A look into Malibran's work on French uniforms might also help.

Seneffe did react to your suggestion:

I'll look at Vanson to see if he can advance any primary sourcing to support his claim. Somehwere I have an abstract of Sabretache articles and will see if I can identify the relevant one and track it down. Malibran doesn't quote any evidence IIRC- certainly not the level of treatment Rousselot goes into.

In other matters of uncertainty concerning French Napoleonic uniforms- Rousselot is usually quite careful to present differing views and sources and give an objective evaluation. He certainly had access to and frequently refers to Vanson, Malibran etc in other contexts, so if they had anything compelling to say on this- I think it is likely he would have quoted them.

With the Grenadier trumpeters Rousselot is pretty adamant that there is no primary evidence for white bearskins- he even identifies the first instance where they occur in uniformlogy in c1850 with Marbot unilaterally changing the colour of the black bearskin shown in a contemporary Hoffman illustration to white- but without Marbot offering any explanation for why he did so. […]

He did not post any result from this search, at least not in that topic. Neither did you.

Now I quote a remark from you from yet another topic, a remark of you I came across in several topics:

Then I suggest you post some of the information to which you refer.

If you won't, then your point is moot and not very reliable.

And simply mentioning that one would have to look at Vanson will not be enough. Again I quote you from the same topic:

No, the information was not posted as requested, it was referenced.

There is a difference…

So please post a quote from Vanson with reference where he explains his reasons for stating that the trumpeters of the Grenadiers ŕ Cheval had white bearskins.

I originally wanted to close my post with a certain remark, but decided against it as I felt it to be to agressive. But in an Armchair General Forum topic you placed it yourself, and again I quote:

… either put up or shut up.

But let me help you! In that same Armchair General Forum Topic a certain Alexandre already did your work for you:

…Except that all the "white bearskins" trace to the général Vanson, so it is not many or several sources which say this. It is one source re-quoted over and over again. And the général Vanson says that he came to know of them from looking at little hand-colored cut-out paper soldiers sold in Alsace in the 1820's. So, if that is enough of a source for you, then you can believe in the white beaskins….

I had been on the verge of posting this when I decided to google "Général Vanson Grenadiers ŕ Cheval" and came across the topic in the Armchair General Forum. The same Alsace collection might well also have been the source of Noirmont and Marbot.

Dempsey / Otto reckons the sappers of the Italian 1st Line had white bearskins in 1807 (i.e. the source is Otto). Did the Otto painter also rely on Vanson? If not, we have another source for white bearskins, I guess. I profess zero expertise, I just bought the book, having read about it in this thread, as coffee table ware.

I actually wonder whether these plates were based on sketches made in the field that were then colourised en masse later, maybe months later. If you did a line drawing of a Napoleonic soldier – think of the Norman Swales drawings – there'd be few or no colours and you'd later be relying on your notes or worse your memory. So you sketched in a bearskin, left it white and it stayed that way.

Did the Otto painter also rely on Vanson?

Hardly, because Vanson wrote about a (half-)century later.
The Alsace collection also dates from after the Napoleonic Period.
With the second part of your comment I agree fully.

the sappeur of the first Italian Line has nothing to do with the Grenadiers ŕ Cheval – those are two different units.

The author of the so called Otto manuscript did not rely on any other work than on his own observations.

And the Otto manuscript shows the trumpeter of the Grenadiers ŕ Cheval with a black, not a white bearskin.

The Otto Manuscript also shows a trumpeter of the Guard Chasseurs a Cheval in a black colpack. They wore black in the field and on campaign and white for full dress. Unfortunately full dress is not shown in the Otto Manuscript.

@ von W

Yes, I get that. It does suggest, however, that a/ white bearskins weren't wholly unknown; and b/ that if a line unit could afford to distribute them to its sappers, they can't have been prohibitively costly, or difficult*, to obtain.

So two of the more obvious objections to the possibility of a white bearskin somewhat recede.

@ DrsRob – interesting. I haven't read Dempsey yet, I've just flicked through. I did note, though, that his source shows the dragoons of the Guard with dark green coats but mid-green shabraques. Now that's something I have never seen in any other depiction elsewhere.

* I am actually assuming, in all this, that bearskins were made of bear. That may be an assumption too far of course.

…that his source shows the dragoons of the Guard with dark green coats but mid-green shabraques.

Colors fade over time and the shabraque and the habits probably were procured at different times. And the Dragoons of the Guard were formed in 1806.

Regarding the use of white bearskins for cavalry units, especially trumpeters I found the following units had, at one time or another, white bearskins issued for the units' trumpeters:

-The 12th Cavalry Regiment in 1802 (Knotel).

-A carabinier trumpeter in a transitional uniform has both a cuirass and a white bearskin (Rousselot and Knotel).

-The 12th Cuirassier Regiment in 1805 (Vanson and Rousselot).

-The Trumpet Major of the 5th Cuirassier Regiment in 1808 (Marckolsheim and Rousselot).

-Musician of the 5th Regiment of Cuirassiers in 1808 (Marckolsheim and Rousselot).

-The 1st Cuirassier Regiment had trumpeters in white colpacks in 1812 (Rousselot and Lejeune).

-The trumpet major of the 11th Dragoons in 1809-1810 wore a white colpack (Rousselot and Marckelsheim).

-The elite company of the 16th Dragoons in 1807 (Marckolsheim and Rousselot).

-The elite company of the 16th Dragoons in 1813 (Rousselot and Marcholsheim).

-The elite company of the 16th Dragoons in 1812 (Knotel).

-The elite company of the 23d Dragoons in 1809-1810 (Rousselot and Marckolsheim).

-The elite company of the 20th Chasseurs a Cheval in 1809 in a white colpack (Knotel).

-The elite company of the 25th Chasseurs a Cheval in 1812 in a white colpack (Knotel).

-The elite company of the 9th Hussars in 1812 in a white colpack (Knotel).

-The entire elite company of the 11th Hussars in 1810 in white colpacks (Knotel).

-The 2d Guard Lancer Regiment trumpet major in a white colpack (Knotel).

-The Guard Chasseurs a Cheval in a white colpack (Knotel).

-The Guard Artillerie a Cheval in a white colpack (Knotel).

-The 1st Artillery Train Regiment of the Guard in a white colpack (Knotel).

It is worth noting that the cuirassier and dragoon regiments also used black bearskins, colpacks, and the regular helmets with white horsehair 'tails' for their trumpeters as well as carabinier style helmets with a white comb sometimes combined with a white horsehair tail. This was many times the call of the regimental commanders for what they wanted to do, despite any pertinent regulations during the period.

Especially green housing (shabraque) and portmanteau are consistently shown in a lighter shade than the uniform in the Otto series. And generally, tarifs show this not to have been the case. Not to much should therefore be made of it.

yes white bearskins caps were worn, no dispute about this, confirmed by other contemporary prints, Hoffmann shows white ones for parade dress of Chasseurs ŕ Cheval and Artillerie ŕ cheval of the Guard, but for Grenadiers ŕ Cheval – no white bearskin cap, but as Drs Rob already pointed out a hat was worn on parade dress.

Vanson is wrong, as those who copy uncritically, just trusting one source alone, is a very weak position, the absence of white bearskin caps for GAC in contemporary prints – confirmed by written documents found by Rousselot in the depots, strongly suggest that for parade the carried the hat and in campaign a black bearskin cap.
For me – to quote – the discussion is indeed moot in case nothing better than Vanson comes up.

Brechtel198:
Regarding the use of white bearskins for cavalry units, especially trumpeters I found the following units had, at one time or another, white bearskins issued for the units' trumpeters:

Very interesting, but what about the trumpeters of the GaC? I showed you where Vanson got his info. Do you have any stand on the reliability of the Alsace collection??

Are you sure that is where Vanson 'got his info'? Did General Vanson actually state that idea or are you merely surmising that he did?

I suggest that you take a look at two books:

-Les Petits Soldats de Strasbourg by Jean-Pierre Klein.

-Paper Soldiers: The Illustrated History of Printed Armies of the 18th, 19th, and 20th Centuries by Edward Ryan.

Rousselot on the topic:

'The full-dress headgear was a black felt hat, edged with crested braid, furnished with cords and a cockade strap and gold terminals at the corners…Although all modern works show the trumpeters in full dress with a white bearskin, no trace of this can be found in the contracts, regimental inventories or in the general list of issues carried out from 1 January 1808 to 11 May 1814, while, in contrast, braided hats are constantly referred to for the trumpeters.'

'The few, strictly contemporary source documents we know of always show the black bearskin or the hat. We feel that the white bearskin was 'invented' a long time after the fall of the Empire, and we find it shown for the first time in Marbot and Noirmont's work published about 1850.'

It should also be noted that the trumpeters for the Elite Gendarmes were issued black bearskins.

the so called Alsace collection is discussed very critically, some people believe it is a fake.

Handlebarbleep already gave some sterling advise about dealing with uniforms.

Are you sure that is where Vanson 'got his info'? Did General Vanson actually state that idea or are you merely surmising that he did?

I surmised nothing. I only quoted you the findings of a certain Alexandre from the topic in the Armchair General Forum.

I suggest that you take a look at two books:

No, I'm satisfied with the findings of Alexandre. If you doubt the correctness, I suggest that you check it yourself.

Brechtel198:
Rousselot on the topic: …

As already discussed by John Cook in the article quoted above by: Allan F Mountford

I read that "bearskins" were often made of goat. Can't remember the source (certainly secondary, though), but it's surely someone else will remember too?

I think Paul Dawson mentioned this for the foot Grenadiers of the Imperial Guards in his book on the Mounted Grenadiers.

in case memory isn't failing me – Rousselot is discussing this as well in one of his plates about Guard units with bearskin caps.

As already discussed by John Cook in the article quoted above…

And…?

Brechtel198:
And…?

You objected that the article by John Cook didn't mention Vanson, so I assumed you had read id carefully. Now you discuss the findings of Rousselot in such a manner that it suggests it's a fresh introduction.

I see also that von Winterfeldt does more or less the same.

That leaves me wondering … who still bothers reading everyone's posts?

in case one likes to read Vansons statement
consult

Sabretache 1895

page 415

Do I read all posts, no – Brechtel is on my stifle list

Now you discuss the findings of Rousselot in such a manner that it suggests it's a fresh introduction.

It was a quote from Rousselot, not a discussion. Rousselot's work is excellent and worth having which is why I have most of the plates and the book about the plates, as well as Edward Ryan's excellent work on Rousselot.

So, I don't see your problem here.

In La Sabretache of 1895 (3d Volume) on page 415 the white bearskin is mentioned for grande tenue for trumpeters in passing, along with the description of the plume. This is in addition to the usual black bearskin that was worn on campaign.

The uniform for the Grenadiers a Cheval is covered on pages 408 to 416 with four illustrations.