"Green uniform of the French Light Infantry 1814" Topic

@von Winterfeldt: Sorry, I now see that you were talking about the goatskin caps, not about the white bearskins. About your last remark: I figured as much.

@ Brechtel198: The article by John Cook was quoted in full by Allan F Mountford. He bases his conclusion of "no white bearskin" largely on Rousselot. You restricted yourself to complaining that Vanson was not mentioned. And then you quote Rousselot in full.

Brechtel198:
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.

von Winterfeldt:
in case one likes to read Vansons statement
consult

Sabretache 1895

page 415

@Brechtel198: Combining these two statements I conclude that you have found the article by Général Vanson. So you now know what his source was. I'm surprised you do not mention this.

I found Vanson quite vague about his sources, no critical discussion of them, unlike John Cook for example.

Alexandre from the Armchair General Forum says that his source is what is now known as the Alsace collection. But to you that's not clear?

Could you quote the passage in French?

Never mind, I checked the tekst myself on Gallica. Vanson does not mention his source for the white bearskin at all. He does say: "Il existe un très grand nombre d'estampes représentant des grenadiers à cheval" and also says he uses three tarifs. Other than that the descriptions of pieces of clothing including numbers of buttons must be based on the tarifs, we cannot be certain what he used as source for any particular piece of clothing or equipment.

I did not come across any mention of the paper soldiers (i.e. the Alsace collection) unless that is what he means by 'estampes'.

Basically Vanson therefore does not give any independent source. As he wrote in 1895 he does not qualify as one himself.

I agree, we don't know what "estampes" Vanson used, only contemporary ones or the later howlers of white bearskin caps as John Cook pointed out.

It is striking that the superb series of Hoffmann prints – showing the early Garde Impériale – doesn't show a Grenadier à Cheval trumpeter or also musician with a white bearskin cap – while he shows it for Chasseurs à Cheval and Artillerie à Cheval – for GaC – as already pointed out several times – for parade dress – a hat and not a bearskin cap.

So far I couldn't find any contemporary print with a white bearskin cap for GaC, neither Hoffmann, nor Otto – maybe Martinet covered this as well, but I don't have all prints of his series.

Vanson draws the white bearskin cap out of the air – not mentioning from where he draws his wisdom, John Cook explained this very well, how the white bearskin cap of GaC came into existence post Boney wars, as other mistakes as uniforms of Tirailleurs du Po.

I would disagree regarding Vanson. He was an important authority on uniforms, just as Knotel, Rousselot, Leliepvre, Malibran and others are. Therefore, he is a source, albeit a secondary one just as the other four who are mentioned in this posting.

The article referred to in the 1905 La Sabretache is quite detailed with uniform listings from the Grenadiers a Cheval. In the listing, no bearskins at all are listed or shown, which demonstrates why it is shown in narrative form instead. The material might be from Fallou, but I am not sure.

We were talking about the white bearskin for the trumpeters of the Grenadiers à Cheval. General Vanson does not give any indication where he got the idee. Therefore he does not count as an independent source on this subject.
Whether he is a notable secondary (tertiary) source in general is another matter entirely. On the subject of the Alsace collection one might read his discussion in Sabretache 1896 (pp 551-559).

Brechtel198:
The article referred to in the 1905 La Sabretache …

There is no article on the GaC in the 1905 La Sabretache. I assume you mean that in the 1895 edition.

…which demonstrates why it is shown in narrative form instead…

Whatever do you mean by that? That V. drops the white bearskin in the middle of his text because he has no proof?

There is no article on the GaC in the 1905 La Sabretache. I assume you mean that in the 1895 edition.

That is correct-I have the date of the volume incorrect here.

But, if you take a look at the last posting on page 2 of this thread, dated yesterday (6 May) at 5:40 AM, you'll see the following in case you missed it:

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.

Brechtel198
But, if you take a look at the last posting on page 2 of this thread, dated yesterday (6 May) at 5:40 AM, you'll see the following in case you missed it:

I didn't miss it, I even quoted it; see the top of this page!

enough said, Vanson demolished about white bearskin caps as all the rest, I move on.

How is General Vanson 'demolished'?

Hs anyone here actually read Dawson's tour de force 'Napoleons Gods'? In it he lists all the clothing returns for the Regiment and though he mentions Vanison, he nevertheless discounts the white bearskin as he could not find any first hand evidence. But he does mention the very expensive musician's bicorn

Even Michael Head's book doesn't agree with the white bearskin, and he wrote and illustrated the book in 1978.

link

The clothing returns are available from La Sabretache in at least two articles, one of them being mentioned here.

I have one of the books that was done on the Grenadiers a Cheval by Dawson and to put it simply, I'm not impressed.

@Brechtel198:
The article mentioned here has a clothing list, that consists of bills for officer's clothing. The white bearskin cap is only mentioned in the description, without any proof given.
Now you mention another article. Does this even mention the white bearskin? And if so, does it give a primary source? Otherwise it's all academic.

Now I again quote a remark from you from another topic:

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 where that article can be found 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 with reference from that other article a quote where it's stated that the trumpeters of the Grenadiers à Cheval had white bearskins and what proof the author has.

Maybe there was a trial with an ordinary "bearskin" dyed white, and it looked ridiculous, so the chapeau was retained (especially if it were so costly).

An earlier post on this subject from me was quoted above- I didn't post again because I didn't find anything in Vanson which pointed me to any primary evidence of the existence of white bearskins for the GaC Trumpeters- so I concluded that the General was a dead end- at least as far as that particular question goes.

It's really hard to understand why this point is still being argued.

As far as Tenue de Service and its variations is concerned, I think everyone here and all of the printed authors agree that black bearskins were used- and I think Rousselot's archive work confirms they existed for the Trumpeters.

As far as Grande Tenue and its variations are concerned, both contemporary iconography (at least one 'official' painting of a state occasion where inaccuracy would hardly be tolerated) and archives confirm that the Trumpeters had bicorne hats of fine quality.

As far as white bearskins are concerned however- unless I've missed something, NO archival reference to such items and NO contemporary iconography has been identified to indicate their actual existence. That really is a pretty big gap credibly to close with references from late c19th authors.

Whether or not one is impressed by Dawson's book- it is hard to dispute that he's done his homework with Regimental primary sources. If it read it correctly- white bearskins would be the ONLY item of GaC clothing not referenced in clothing lists.

Isn't it time just to call the white bearskins story as one of those errors which sometimes creeps in to the study of a subject (doubtless done in good faith) and then gains false substance simply by being repeated?

I totally agree, but one small village outside of Gaul still holds out…

Love it!

-> vW

For me – to quote – the discussion is indeed moot in case nothing better than Vanson comes up.
AND

Vanson draws the white bearskin cap out of the air – not mentioning from where he draws his wisdom,..

Not disagreeing at all.
1/ I see Vanson, though deified for pushing the creation of collections for the Musée d'Armée, is equally criticised if I get the translation right by none other than Frederic Masson in an open article to members in 1912 (La Sabre. #238 Oct.).

"General Vanson refused to publish documents to accommodate, to discuss and refute them even, to redirect them to the new ones, to make them his thing."

Now this may have been a reference to the collections themselves.

…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…
AND_

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.

2/ However, a contemporary colleague, Cmdt. Bucquoy cites in his works- of Vanson in relation to the formation of the Cuirassiers et al, and therein details how the 'Cavalry' elite companies were formed, and uniformed, then later effaced within 2 years by Napoleon with the words 'the regiments are elite and need no more status'.

The highest numbered cavalry regiments who were then demobilised and transferred to cuirassiers, indeed most of their uniforms masse, even the pink surtout etc. were used.

Costly? Unobtainable. Check the stores!

White bearskins of trumpeters from those units, hence the 12th Cuirassiers had these in place in 1805 (and lets say earlier to amalgamation dates), according to Bucquoy, as well as more regular trumpeters yellow (facing) garments and helmets (once issued).

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

And should be equally used with some circumspection unless verifiable. Elsewhere there are discrepancies that cannot be accurate depictions, or mislabelled to be generous.

As for 'dyeing' dark things white? Ah no, pretty sure titanium white extract wasn't available back then…

regards
davew

Just re-read my last posting. I didn't intend to imply that white bearskins didn't exist at all- they certainly did in other other units- just that there appears to be literally no contemporary evidence at all that the GaC ever used them.

I didn't intend to imply that white bearskins didn't exist at all- they certainly did in other other units- just that there appears to be literally no contemporary evidence at all that the GaC ever used them.

Indeed.

As posted previously, these units used a white bearskin/colpack for trumpeters. The artist/source is shown in parenthesis:

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.

Repeating your post from page 1 almost verbatim does not strengthen your case. We're talking about whether the trumpeters of the Grenadiers à Cheval used white bearskins. Whether those of any other unit had them is irrelevant.

It isn't irrelevant because I was replying to a comment by another poster. Perhaps you didn't understand that?

Another aspect of the subject that is being overlooked is the power and discretion of regimental commanders on the subject of the uniforms for heads of column. You just never know…

@DrsRob +1

Brechtel198:
Another aspect of the subject that is being overlooked is the power and discretion of regimental commanders on the subject of the uniforms for heads of column. You just never know…

Firstly as the Imperial Guard served under the eye of Napoleon I think it's colonel had less leeway than those of the line.
Secondly, as long as no proper archival research has been done, as it hadn't in the past, one can say you never know.
Now, however, we do know!

Cmdt. Bucquoy cites in his works- of Vanson in relation to the formation of

… and I was pointing out, since it hadn't already been mentioned, the linearity between actual white bearskins-Vanson- etc. and perhaps his 'prediliction' for economy of information, hence sources… or probable inflation of 'facts'. Did he hide the sources such that Rousellot couldn't find them, ahem…?
d

Firstly as the Imperial Guard served under the eye of Napoleon I think it's colonel had less leeway than those of the line.
Secondly, as long as no proper archival research has been done, as it hadn't in the past, one can say you never know.
Now, however, we do know!

There was more than one regiment in the Imperial Guard unless you're merely referring to the commanding officer of the Grenadiers a Cheval. And there was more than one over the course of the regiment's life.

We do know? All any of us has done is scratch the surface of research on the Napoleonic period, the Grande Armee and its regiments. So, saying that 'Now…we do know!' is just a little presumptuous, don't you think?

How can you use "You just never know" to justify an unsusbstantiated single secondary source, particularly when it flies in the face of contempraneous evidence?

That's the difference between advancing an argument and being argumentative.

Pink dye was well known at this period, so the non existant bearskins might well have pink….You just never know.

They might have been given these by visiting aliens…..You just never know.

This might all be the fault of a conspiracy of bearskin denyers……You just never know.

And thus a cable TV channel special is born!….You just never know.

This might mean that one of us might admit that one of our heroes was actually fallible, and just plain got it wrong….You just never know.

No, wait, that's going too far, that's never going to happen! Uniformologists I like (especially if they are published in La Sabertache) are never wrong, whilst those pesky modern ones who keep unearthing evidence that contradicts me, should never be trusted.

@Handlebarbleep + 1

Yes it's a super list of white bearskins used by other units. Still absolutely no contemporary evidence whatever of the existence of white bearskins for the GaC as far as I can see however.
Shame that it has taken this long but hopefully, when this last twitching stops, another moribund Napoleonic myth will finally be put, figuratively, out of its misery.

Seems to me that the white bearskin 'discussion' is nothing more than trying to prove a negative, in that this trumpeter distinction did not exist. That is a logical fallacy.

From David Hackett Fischer's Historians' Fallacies: Toward a Logic of Historical Thought, 47-49:

'The fallacy of the negative proof is an attempt to sustain a factual proposition merely by negative evidence. It occurs whenever a historian declares 'there is no evidence that X is the case,' and then proceeds to affirm or assume that not-X is the case…The only correct empirical procedure is to find affirmative evidence of not-X-which is often difficult, but never in my experience impossible.'

Sound familiar? It certainly does with some of the comments in this thread regard the white bearskin..

Further, Fischer writes, 'A good many scholars would prefer not to know that some things exist. But not knowing that a thing exists is different from knowing that it does not exist.'

With that, I shall continue to paint my trumpeters of the Grenadiers a Cheval with white bearskins… ;-)

That you cannot proof a negative does not mean that the positive need not be proven. That is: you still have to offer proof that a white bearskin was actually used.

And simply saying that some authority says so will not be enough. As Carl Sagan puts it in The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark (2011) p. 28:

One of the great commandments of science is, "Mistrust arguments from authority." … Too many such arguments have proved too painfully wrong. Authorities must prove their contentions like everybody else.

The bottom line is that we don't know for sure either way.

And, again, the attempt to prove a negative is illogical.

And until that authority is proven to be wrong, it isn't.

The inability to find evidence is not conclusive.

And quoting Carl Sagan is way out there in the universe and don't believe that Sagan was an historian, whereas Fischer is. Sagan was an astronomer, et al.

An authority that supplies no evidence or proof can only be right by accident.

Rousselot gave the trumpeters hats for full dress and he at least has contemporary evidence, so I consider him proven right.

It defies reason for the trumpeters to have both hats and white bearskin for full dress.

Why would it 'defy reason'? It's the senior Guard cavalry regiment and the regimental commander may have wanted it to be that way. And the hat may have been used for certain full dress occasions, and the white bearskin for others. The Guard was different and this may have been one of the ways that it was.

Sorry, but I'll stick with Vanson and Knotel and their research-as well as give them the benefit of the doubt.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this subject.

You trust research that and you reject research that is clearly referenced and spelled out.

I give up.

I'm reminded of the old saying: You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink.

>>It defies reason for the trumpeters to have both hats and white bearskin for full dress.<<

I wouldn't go there.
If that were so, why then should (G.I.) 'Grenadiers and Chasseurs à pied' continue to wear and be issued bicornes (duplicate headwear) long after their usefulness was otherwise shown.

Perhaps because it was a politically motivated uniform accessory to show the reach and control of the establishment within Paris and other places.

BTW- Rousellot cited the order- "chapeau were to be of the 'quality of general officers'" so they were by no means cheap either. No expense spared on my Garde I believe was the phrase used at some point.

Hence, while my 'reignited' Grenadier a Cheval will be getting new officers and trompettes, they shall remain black. However I forsee a probable conversion [to one] in chapeau for a command 'escort' base of the high command in my future.
regards
davew

@Brechtel198

Psychological rigidity is no substitute for historical enquiry. Errors and misinterpretations are made, even by the very finest and trusted experts. History is an interpretive discipline and inherently revisionist. Primary evidence and research therefore trumps secondary supposition.

Anyone who lays claim to the title historian (professional, amateur, or just enthusiast) signs up to that premise.

So your white bearskinned trumpeter shouldn't appear here, there are several good forums covering fantasy figures. Because that ultimately is what it is. A fantasy, albeit of a long dead uniformologist whose speculations were quite reasonable in the absence of evidence.

That primary evidence has now arrived, we can replace what was speculated with what was known. We, revise, we re-write, we move on. To cling to the previous interpretation and to suggest that others should do so, adds nothing to historical enquiry or reputation. Indeed, it puts all your other excellent advice and interpretation in danger, because how shall we know if these were not also a dearly held "white bearskin"? I'm your customer, your books grace my shelves. When I hand over my hard earned pound I trust you to do the research, so I don't have to. Trust is a very delicate thing. It takes a lifetime to establish, but a split second to destroy.

It's a bit like when I discovered Sir Arthur Conan Doyle believed in fairies. Yeah, I know Sherlock Holmes was made up too, but really?

SHaT1984 +1

Handlebarbleep,

Once again, the attempt to prove a negative is an illogical fallacy and has nothing to do with historical inquiry.

Paul :)

Newton and Astrology.

There is a listing of the uniforms of the Grenadiers a Cheval in the Carnet de la Sabretache, Second Volume 1903 on pages 132-141 which is interesting and helpful.

Of note, the only headgear that is listed are the bonnets de police-no chapeus or bearskins, white or black.

While the return is for the period 1st January 1808 to 23 July 1814, I cannot believe that no bearskins were purchased within that timeframe due to loss (in combat or other reasons) or through general wear and tear. Need to keep on digging….

Yes, we do. And that was my intention with my postings and opinions.

@Brechtel198:
While I did not meen to snub you with the snipped words in my last posting I phrased them carelessly. I know you read them before they were snipped. As I'm still solely responsible for what I write, I therefore owe you an apology.

Brechtel198:
Of note, the only headgear that is listed are the bonnets de police-no chapeus or bearskins, white or black.

The list is only concerned with manufactured clothing and the materials used. It does not include any equipment, saddlery etc. and therefore no bearskins either.

Extremely interesting list nevertheless, though not of any use in resolving the question of the white bearskin.

If that is an accurate statement, then the fatigue caps should not be listed either. The bearskin bonnets are part of the manufactured clothing.

As I'm still solely responsible for what I write, I therefore owe you an apology.

Apology accepted.

Brechtel198
If that is an accurate statement, then the fatigue caps should not be listed either.

At this period the French (and Dutch) clothing tarifs included the forage caps.

The bearskin bonnets are part of the manufactured clothing.

No, they're not. Bearskin caps were bought on contract, not manufactured within the unit.