"Paul Dawson Confection Drouot uniforms" Topic

Indeed, this alone should make you wonder about the esprit de corps of individual regiments, it was a new untested army, not better in any way as that of Blücher or Wellington.

The Bourbons had scrambled regimental organization and had paid little or no attention to the soldierly qualities, as they did not possess them at all themselves.

Veteran officers were cast adrift on half-pay and were replaced by returning royalists, some of whom had been serving against France.

The cavalry arm suffered the most on this subject.

Davout was the one who sorted it out and got the army ready to move into Belgium.

The French beat the Prussians at Ligny, at Quatre Bras stopped the British getting anywhere near the Prussians and at the final action at Waterloo it took two armies to beat them. Not bad for a er 'brittle' army. LOL

coming back to the original topic of this thread

the 21e Chasseurs à cheval already mentionned in my previous post for its unusual uniform
by José Luis Cañibe shared by the authors for next Paul Lindsay Dawson's book at Pen & Sword 2022

I would suggest being careful with French units in dark green uniforms.

The color was obtained by dying the uniform twice-first in dark blue and then in yellow which obtained the correct color.

Over time the yellow would fade and what was left was the dark blue. There is one like that in the West Point Museum and I saw it in 1972 when in my first year at West Point we were taken on a tour of the museum and taken into the storage area where there were at the very least dozens of uniforms.

One was a French chasseur a cheval uniform in dark blue.

You have to be careful in drawing conclusions without the entire set of facts.

Sooooo, I have order both Keith Rocco and Paul Dawson collab books, just awaiting delivery :)

Waterloo: Napoleon's Last Army has arrived. Now awaiting 1st Italian Campaign book!

PLD continues his charge against uniformological inaccuracies
especially regimental bandsmen and musicians as "99% of the representations are total fiction" he confirmed me again his sentence :)

FAKE NEW n°1 about Carabiniers musicians :
the kettledrummers

We are busy editing our forthcoming book on French Line Cavalry and ancillary troops 1808-1815. I thought I would share some observations on the Carabiniers. One of the most cherished myths about the Carabiniers is the dress of the kettledrummers. Rousselot, Pierre Conrad and many other illustrators all present the dress of the kettledrummer. However, it transpires that they are spreading 'fake news'! What, Rousselot is wrong! YES. So lets look at the facts.
When we look at the paper archives for the Carabiniers, we have zero mention of any kettledrums. This is a concern, the other factor is that no man in either regiment is recorded as a kettledrummer. The paper archives of the Grenadiers a Cheval de la Garde, and also the Chasseurs a Cheval de la Garde record both the names of the kettledrummer and their drums. As with the Dragons de la Garde Imperiale, the Carabiniers have not a single piece of archive paper work to support the existence of a kettledrummer. So where does the suggestion come from? A diaryst Matricule Number No. 1926 Charles Schehl of the 2e Carabiniers tells us that the brigade had a single kettledrummer. Therefore, we suppose the kettledrums were paid for and owned by the officers, hence their non appearance in regimental accounts. Most band equipment was owned by the officers as the archive papers of regiments like the 3e de Ligne tell us. So we have one fixed point of evidence. Schel tells us the kettlerummer was present at a parade in Dusseldorf, and that the kettledrummer far from being an adult as every single depiction shows, was in fact a 'enfant de troupe' i.e. a child. When we look at the names of the enfant de troupe in 1811, the 9 boys are all aged 8 to 11, stand under 4ft 5, the average height of a carabinier being 5ft 10, so a clear height difference did exist between a trooper and the 'enfant de troupe'. Therefore, the mis-identification of a child with a grown man in the regiment would be impossible to make. So we are dealing with a child and not a grown man. So what did our child soldier wear? Rousselot presents as his evidence the Petit Soldat de Strasbourg: a soruce that is suspect at best and dates from the 1830's and later. Now, given the Petit Soldat shows the kettledrummer as an adult, and in some cases with a moustache, 'alarm bells' start to ring about the accuracy of the image. Given the artist has mistaken a 10 year old boy for a grown man, what else is wrong? Given the source is not drawn from life, and is made at least 20 years AFTER the event in Dusseldorf, we strongly suspect the depiction is suspect. We do not know what the kettledrummer wore. We suppose, he was dressed like a trumpeter. So what did trumpeters wear? Well, it seems they were dressed as rank and file complete with armour! But would a child be really wearing 'child size' armour and helmet? Nope. We therefore suggest, that what ever the kettledrummer was wearing, it was not the costume shown by Rousselot. Like most of Rousselot's illustrations, he uncirticially copied the Petit Soldat de Strasbourg and other sources as 100% reliable. So where does that leave us? Based on eye-witness testimony the brigade of carabiniers potentially had a kettledrummer, who was a child. The 'enfant de troupe' is not named in either regiment as fullfilling this function which is a concern. What he wore we do not know, likewise we know nothing about the drum banners. Nor do we know anything about the horse harness used. All we can say, is that the known facts contradict 'what we think we know'. For the curious, the trumpeters of the carabiniers marched to Russia decked out in Imperial Livery, but the dress of the trumpeters is as they say, another story entirely.

Paul Lindsay Dawson
28th february 2022 at Confection Drouot

So they are saying Rouselot is wrong, the planche from "Le Plumet No. 46. Carabiniers: Timbalier du 2e Régiment en 1811" by Rigonaud is also wrong – the latter attributes his source as "Manuscrit de Marckolsheim – colelction de R. Forthoffer". I know who I would sooner believe……….

Compelling evidence both ways.

One would have to ensure that ALL relevant information was available and parsed accurately; where there is a gap, there is doubt, about either hypothesis.

As we know, commercial interests [at all times] and revenue/ income dependancy means that some people 'ad-libbed' parts that did not otherwise exist in certain corps, just because they may have [had] providence in others.

Sadly if these volumes only cover the 'flatlining years of descent' of Empire, without a based starting point, then they'll be of little interest to me.

Enthusiasts don't recognise, in general, the period of 'definition and reconstruction' without war that occurred post 1809 until 1812 came along.

Few enough of us model the 'highlight' years of warring campaigns 1805-07 as it is. A phenomenon largley built on the basis of figures produced [and thereby restricted] commercially around 1812 -15. *With exceptions*.

cheers d

PLD's volumes will cover the whole period from the Revolution to the Hundred Days if there will be enough customers readers at the Rendez-Vous for the first volumes beginning by the end, the period 1811-1815

FAKE NEWS n°2 Carabiniers

More Fake News exposed! Our continuing work on the uniforms of the 1e Empire has exposed major weaknesses in the historical research by many famous illustrators. This image was created by Lucien Rousselot. He assumed – on no evidence whatsover- that manusrcript images like Petit Soldat de Strasbourg were genuine 1e Empire images of soldiers. Sadly, as we explored in our last post, this series of images is deeply flawed. It is from this series of images that Rousselot famously recreated the trumpeters of the carabiniers in 1810. Sadly, he is totally wrong when we consult the archive paper work of the regiments.
Marshal Davout drew up the brigade of Carabiniers for inspection on Bastille Day 1810 at Lunéville. The men were all wearing bearskins, blue habits with red facings, just as they had worn when charging at Wagram. Clearly, despite the decree of 24 December 1809 ordring the brigade into armour, nothing had been done. Davout issued orders on the 15th that new clothing was to be issued to respect the recent regulations, and the regiments were authorised to order the production of helmets: helmets in both the cuirassier and carabinier regiments were made to regimental specialfication and purchased by the regiment, the armour complete with fraise and metallassure was provided by the Army.
New clothing was completed by 1 October 1810, and was issued between the 5th and 13th October 1810. Existing boots, leather work, harness, housse, schabraque were all retained. Helmets were issued on 13th October. Armour arrived on 1 November 1810 and the regiments first parade in armour was 5 December 1810. Rousselot, in assuming the Petit Soldat de Strasbourg was correct, clearly assumes that armour arrived before new clothing or helmets, when the inverse is true. Two caissons, each loaded with 650 cuirassiers, fraise and metallassures were sent to each regiment on 20th October from Paris. So the armour arrived ONCE the regiments were dressed in white and had helmets. Therefore, trumpeters as shown here is a fiction of the imagination of Petit Soldat de Strasbourg artists imagination. Again, when we look at the important review made July 1810, trumpeters wore habits and not a single white bearskin is recorded by any contemporary document or illustration: just like the white bearskins used by the trumpeters of the Grenadiers a Cheval which never existed, so too the carabiniers never had trumpeters with white bearskins. Again, no evidence from the epoch exists of trumpeters in surtouts, as they are recorded in July 1810 in habits of reversed colours. . By and large, it also seems that the housse was Bleu Imperiale when armour was first issued as Davout ordered these to be retained. We assume this only changed to Bleu de Ciel in the course of 1812. Again, we know the old style leather work was used in 1810, as we find a note from January 1811 ordering the master saddler to alter the waist belts so as to be worn with a cuirass. As with out post about the kettledrummer of the carabiniers, it is always important to question sources, even if it carries the name of Rousselot. However picturesque the image may be, its Fake News

Paul Lindsay Dawson
6th March 2022
Confection Drouot

Prince of Essling
"So they are saying Rouselot is wrong, the planche from "Le Plumet No. 46. Carabiniers: Timbalier du 2e Régiment en 1811" by Rigonaud is also wrong – the latter attributes his source as "Manuscrit de Marckolsheim – colelction de R. Forthoffer". I know who I would sooner believe………."

Would you believe the contemporaries De Bossett, Hamilton-Smith and the countless, renowned, 'uniformologists' that have come after?

Thanks Lillian for the explanation.
Naturally I'll keep a watch…

Things like "shown here is a fiction of the imagination of…" worry me. What's to say the date was simply incorrect, whether 'by design' or error, annotated some time later?
Other factors of course, but it's not a blanket issue.

I've seen enough business to know pretty obvious errors can be made in the most meticulous accounting systems, like miss-invoicing hundred of $'000s of dollars (or $millions) resulting in loss for a period of time.
cheers d

all very interesting and it well can be that one mistakes is copied all over again till it appeared to be fact, examples are numerous – like the uniforms of the Tirailleurs du Po, though not interested in the later period I will watch out for the earlier.

Completely within regulations, a 14 or 15 year old "enfant de troupe" could gain employment as a "non-combattant" musician, either filling one of the official regimental billets or paid by the officers as a "gagiste". They would no longer be listed among the enfants. At 16 they could also volunteer as a trooper or "combattant" musician (drummer, cornet, trumpet). The "maîtres ouvriers" were required to each have at least 2 apprentices age 12 through 15. At 16 the apprentices could engage as troopers and be tasked with lesser repairs and maintenance in their company until they could qualify for an opening as a "'maître".

Sources
--- Manual d'officiers 1813, vol. 1
--- Bardin Dictionnaire

"When we look at the names of the enfant de troupe in 1811"
One needs to look in prior years for an enfant who would be at least 14 years old in 1811, and by then no longer listed among the enfants.

"We do not know what the kettledrummer wore. We suppose, he was dressed like a trumpeter."
I would have supposed he was dressed as a musician.

Well said gentlemen and thus, without affirmation of said search/ research, we do not know if 'another' error is being introduced.

All I'd finish with is, as said many times over… in respect of 'decrees' and orders from the top- [current] excitation/ expectation that such things happened immediately are shown again to be completely false.

Without 'prior' work and an example escapes me, (but we seem to be on the old 'chasseur/ eclaireurs/ voltigeurs' treadmill again) very little happened 'on demand'.

I'm very happy to see the due diligence and translations being done, but would perhaps moderate the arbitrary black and white disarray and comments in reverse of everything not proven by such records. After all, the absence of… etc.

cheers d

The carabiniers had a timbalier in their establishment from 1693 to 1788. During some of those years, they were the only unit in the army to have one.
link
link
link

In about 1838, their (honorary) commander, le duc d'Orléans, gave them a timbalier, the only unit in the army to then have one.
Here, painted from life (background left) in 1843 :

Of course, this proves nothing about 1810-1812, except perhaps that the idea of the carabiniers then having a timbalier is in no way outlandish.

================

François Dunkler (Rastatt 1779 – La Haye 1861) was the chef de musique du 2e carabiniers from 1810 to 1 August 1814, when he passed to the 29e de ligne as a musician gagiste chef de musique (only to desert on 28 February 1815).
His son, also François, was a musician gagiste in the 2e carabinier, starting 6 days after his 10th birthday. He, too, transferred to the 29e ligne, and stayed until granted leave to depart on 14 September 1815.
Both went on to rather distinguished careers in music.
link
link

One might assume that the 1er carabiniers also had a chef de musique, but I did not find his name.

Thanks Michman & SHaT1984,

I think we have all had enough of "definitive" answers as there are too many loose threads which can lead in multiple directions.

@Dibble,

I like to keep an open mind on but am more than impressed by your research with contemporary pictures so am more than happy to go with you unless contardictory stuff comers up to take a fresh view.

one has to keep and open mind – Marckolsheim, most likely an invention – in case Dawson provides decent sources like documents from SHD – he has strong arguments – should we negate them?

Thanks PoE, I'm just happy to see a sensible topic/ subject/ reply these days.
;-)
d

Prince of Essling.

I think that always keeping an open mind and most important of all, researching to either confirm or question others research (including mine) is the mark of a serious enthusiast.

Like I have said in the past. If anyone sees an error in my research, please let me know. And if anyone has any questions that need answering, I will try to help. But even I have have limits in the knowledge of my pet subject.

I'm still learning and researching and I'm still finding the odd error or two of my making, so I never rest on my laurels and always expect to be proved wrong but learn something of value from it.

PS. I know I have a rather 'special' view about the hobby of Wargaming, 'whatifs' Napoleon and myth but my track record where helping with enquiry is concerned, is (if I can) all about helping, not confronting. In other words 'I'll be gentle with you…

P
>>researching to either confirm or question others research (including mine) is the mark of a serious enthusiast.

Being a non-conformist (diagnosed~ critical-thinker) I see holes where others see data, so I agree.

I'd never have survived academia [ was Shakespeare on???] so I went into trades and such until a work injury forced me behind a desk. Spent 20 years dealing with stats and such (via QA etc.) when I failed school cert. mathematics!

So I only ever sell myself as having expertise in a minor area, not an expert in anything.

Look forward to more of your gems and insights. After all, the world is spinning again, so why not history…
cheers davew

Carabiniers (3) Trumpeters some further notes by Paul Lindsay Dawson
the Green/Imperial Livery
brand new green habits with Imperial Livery were ordered in late 1811. They were considered
a ) more practical than white
b) Imperial Livery on green habits was official regulation from December 1811,
so clearly the brigade of carabiniers acted very promptly indeed. Makes a lot of sense to dispense with white habits for trumpeters and put them in green. Trumpeters at the review in December 1810 were in white, just as they were in June 1811 before leaving for Dusseldorf. Nothing from the epoch places the trumpeters in Bleu de Ciel habits, but as with kettledrummers, and trumpeters with white bearskins, its a cherished myth that is enshrined as fact. The big question is, did the 13 trumpeters habits per regiment arrive from Luneville before the regiments left for Poland in spring 1812? Nothing from the regiments archives gives an answer.

We know green habits were used 1813-1814, and then white habits 1814-1815 and then green again in Hundred Days. I think the assumption is reversed colours were used, even after adoption of armour. The painting by Gros*, like with the painting of Walther, I feel is very reliable. I suspect the green habits made in 1811 were kept in store till issued in 1813, except for the squadron reformed in Germany, who were clothed and equipped in Germany using what ever kit the men had dragged back from Russia with them as a pattern for new items to be made from

The trumpet major has a blue surtout in a portrait, so the other trumpeters may have worn such garments. Certainly no trumpeters surtouts existed, which supports the iconographic record.

*Antoine-Jean Gros (1814) Le général de Lariboisière faisant ses adieux à son fils the day of his death in the battle of Moskowa (Borodino for english-speaking-russian world), showing trumpeters on the right of the painting

tragic fate behind this portrait, father and son were both killed in Russia in 1812

>>*Antoine-Jean Gros (1814) Le général de Lariboisière faisant ses adieux à son fils the day of his death in the battle of Moskowa (Borodino for english-speaking-russian world), showing trumpeters on the right of the painting
>> tragic fate behind this portrait, father and son were both killed in Russia in 1812<<

Now who's being a bit precious with the truth?
The painting isn't a war time scene- rather its described as an allegorical one of the fathers devotion to his lost son, who yes was wounded at Borodino and died of wounds.

Further it is cited that GDV Lariboisière died after catching typhus and was too weak to recover. (Six VolII).

Not important, just saying lets not weave fantasy into a story. Theres enough of that already…
d

Gros wasn't on the battle field – I agree with SHaT1984 in his analysation. Faber du Faur, who was there, shows at least trooper in light blue, same as Albrecht Adam, supposedly their stable jackets, there is / was a big discussion about this which ended in no conlusion, it should be somewhere in TMP as well.

FWIW PLD's Waterloo uniforms book is £3.99 GBP on Kindle at the moment, which is £30.00 GBP less than the hardback. OK, you only get the text – the pictures probably render in black and white – but then again you're only paying 11% of the hardback price.

I have bought it to follow the thinking here really. I don't really have any dog in the French uniforms fight, but any solid pretext for making those endless line and light battalions look a bit less identical is most welcome.

>>I have bought it to follow the thinking here really. I don't really have any dog in the French uniforms fight, but any solid pretext for making those endless line and light battalions look a bit less identical is most welcome.

I do, and I agree… I have no use foe e-versions nor the subject matter (other than technical curiosity now)- so many mindlessly same-same armies of 'blue' and green [invariably 1812].

THATS WHY 45+ years ago I determined, to show '\/' to the planet and follow my own path,,, as yet uncompleted… >> TMP link

vW- I'm reasonably confident I captured the 'Carabiniers' debate in the Redux thread TMP link

in case Dawson provides decent sources like documents from SHD – he has strong arguments – should we negate them?

No I think not. But having evidence is one matter; and drawing conclusions that negate another must align, otherwise, we are left with 'opinions' yet again.

[I also have documents from SHD/ SHaT and have contrary 'numbers' to many published in books? Who's right?]

I'm sure PLD has integrity in his mind, but as we know, biases do strongly affect outcomes.

Now I have his book on The Guard Cavalry I can understand more into what his online precís offer and how his 'left-brain/ scientific analysis' thinking alines with my own. And the uniform revelations are amazing, provided the absence of records is not distorting the facts. That is the caution.

ahh well
(I really need a croissant to go with my coffEE!)
-dave-

I've had a quick look at the Kindle version of this and it does have colour illustrations, depending which Kindle model you have obviously.

At first glance my impression is that this is going to be a dull read because of the way it is structured. There is a chapter on what the army wore, but for pages on end, it goes through each unit, regiment by regiment, commenting on whether it had any green fabric in inventory. If not, their drummers must have been in blue. Then it's the next unit, and they didn't have any green fabric, so their drummers must have been in blue. Then it's the next unit, and they didn't have any green fabric, so their drummers must have been in blue. After quite a bit of this – there are a hundred-odd infantry regiments or something – I am wondering who cares that much about drummers. It's too ground-up, basically, and reads like someone has written up the notes they took.

Maybe I am just spoiled by 40 years of Haythornthwaite / Fosten / Chappell production values. But what I'd sort of expect of a uniforms volume is a general description of what the writer / illustrator thinks was worn, with some example plates. These would, so far as I can tell, depict Armee du Nord soldiers in cutaway coats and plastron-fronted coats in a ratio of about 1 to 1, voltigeurs in fusilier uniforms, and so forth. Uniforms of the Peninsular War is a good example – there are soldiers dressed correctly, irregularly, and in rags, with text explaining the rationale for these depictions. There are a number of these between chapters 16 and 17 but otherwise much of the book appears to be quite dry recitation.

As it is I am a bit bewildered – so far – at who this book is really for. Probably all will be clearer when I have spent more time with it.

@4thC…

Yes- these are 'technical' not necessarily illustrative books.

I'm still formulating my thoughts on the authors 'style' and presentation for a real 'review'. [As I engorge myself of the 'Guard Cavalry' over a wine on a Friday nite].

As I said I'm not interested in '15 much at all any more. However, if he's used the same format, that needs a serious cognitive and broadly knowledgeable EDITOR is obvious.

The chapters are a bit chaotic; a bit repetitive; a bit disorganised (having to read the 1812 paragraphs to find a snippet of RELEVANT information that should have been included in the 1800-03 area [several times over]); I can see why you'd be lost in an e-version.

The technical stuff I admire, and his reasoning for complete reversal of 'current theories' is persuasive and quite logical.

Tho pages and pages of line repetitive 'Sources' is just silly. No need to 'pad' such a book with mindless verbiage.

However I did find a couple of absolute clangers in the text/ captioning (more than stated elsewhere), that a reasonably knowledgeable editor would have changed.

The 'bias' to deny the plethora of 'fake' uniforms so popular is the strong driving force, which in a way I cannot deny him, yet the errors and mis-publishing detracts from his authority to do so with equanimity.

I'm torn, but will give a fair assessment, but I still have to buy the 'Guard Infantry' because he is right on so many points. And I'm a nerd at heart…

regards
davew

PM- >>Haythornthwaite / Fosten / Chappell
I'd no longer classify the former with the latter two who truly 'specialised' their expertise.
I've seen too much repetitive pulp from him and frankly long in the tooth without adequate sources, they're likely to be the fiction of which we are the victims…

Ospreys etc.

PLD & Otto Manuscript

I realise I may sound 'like a stuck record' about the importance of research and not taking sources at face value. Here is an example of what I mean.
The Otto manuscript, also known as Kolbe, has long been taken as being a period source and dating – according to Guy Dempsey – to summer 1807. Sadly, in the most recent re-issue of the series, very little, if any, archive work was done to evaluate the source, beyond relying on the evaluation of Rousselot and Rigo.
So lets look at the 5e Chasseurs. The regiment is exceptionally well documented: we have reviews relevant to the Otto MS, notably new year 1805, August 1805, June 1807, January 1808. Reviewed in August 1805 we find the elite company in dolmans and everone else in Kinskis. However, reviewed in summer 1806, the inspector notes the regiment was dressed in kinski, and had taken delivery of new schakos, which had been sent from France to Germany. Comte Daru tells us that in March 1807, the units clothing was 'totally worn out' and was replaced by items made at Breslau and Potsdam. Reviewed on 1 June 1807, the regiment was totally dressed in kinskis, every man had a schako, and not a single colpack existed. Reviewed in new year 1808, the Inspector again confirms that no dolmans existed, no schako a flamme existed, no colpacks. The unit had black plumes.
We are left to wonder if
a) Otto witnessed the regiment in late summer 1805,
b) the 5e Chasseurs adopted dolmans at some point in 1808 and took back Schako a flamme
c) Otto merely copied at some point in time, a published engraving.
So we ask: how do we know the Otto MS is from the 1e Empire? When was the artis working? Ive research every regiment in the Manuscript, and the evidence is overhwelming for a date in spring to summer 1808 with a lot of very dubious images. What do I mean? Well the 9e Cuirassiers trumpeter is shown with a bearskin: that regiment NEVER had bearskins either as cavalerie or cuirassiers. The 9e Cuirassier trooper is shown with white plume and no giberne: we know for fact every man in the regment in 1805, 1806, 1807, 1808 and 1809 had a giberne and had a red plume; therefore what ever regiment is shown it cannot be the 9e.
I realise the Otto MS is considered a reliable, and genuine source from the epoch, but under close examination it fails to be credible in many places. Don't get me wrong, Otto MS is highly reliable for some regiments like the 3e de Ligne, but in a lot of cases, the images are at huge variance to known facts. It saddens me that no one has actually minutely examined this famous source, to test its credibility and has left a legacy of missinformation which Rigo and Rousselot are to blame for.

Sources: reviewed on 3 August 1805, the regiment had 512 dolman, of which 350 needed repairs and 162 were scheduled to be put in the trash. The regiment also had in use 376 surtouts. The inspecting officer General Latour-Maubourg ordered that the dolman was to be taken out of use and replaced by surtouts, ordering 202 to be made. The next inspection dated 1 June 1807 tells us 610 surtrouts were in use with 723 white gilets, the bulk of which had been taken from stores at Breslau and Potsdam. When we look at the next inspection, carried out on 19 January 1808 – exactly the time the Otto artist is said to be working – we find the regiment had 979 surtouts in use, and that 756 schako had been issued since 1805 to replace the schako a flamme. Ergo what ever Otto has witnessed, the 5e were not dressed in Dolmans or Schako a Flamme when the manuscript is said to be made. No colpacks either in 1807 or 1808. I always understood this image to show the regiment in 1805 and no later. It cannot show the regiment in 1807. I suspect Otto copied this image.

Paul Lindsay Dawson
Uniforming the Past blog
27th march 2022

My forthcoming book on the cavalry will present the uniform of every cavalry regiment from archive sources, supported by reliable inconograpgy. A lot of the work of Rousselot, Bucqouy and others will be shown to be wrong alas. As well as new discoveries made, like this sapeur of the 12e Chasseurs during the Peninsular War
90% of chasseurs à cheval regiments were likewise devoid of sapeurs, like infantry regiments. Despite what artists show, only one Hussard unit ever had sapeurs, yet because these uniforms are presented in numerous books they 'have to be true'. Sadly, a lot of 'beloved' uniforms are fiction as we have demonstrated for the carabiniers.
Paul Lindsay Dawson

"However, reviewed in summer 1806, the inspector notes the regiment was dressed in kinski, and had taken delivery of new schakos, which had been sent from France to Germany."

If the regiment added a yellow clothe "flamme" to their shakos (at their own expense), would these be presented, reviewed and recorded in an inspection report ?

Did the inspector really write "kinski", or "habit-veste courte" ? Mid-1806 predates by 2+ years the next oldest use of the word "kinski" that I knew about. Would the inspector in 1806 necessarily know and use words like "kinski", "dolman" or "habit-veste courte" for various chasseur à cheval short green coats exactly as a uniformologist would today ?

From Martinet :

Then there is this curiosity ….

Often described as painted by Maximilien Joseph de Schauenburg, the only real link to that name is its barely legible appearance oh the back of the canvas.

The captain shown to the left could be de Schauenburg, who was promoted captain in the 5th chasseurs in March 1807, holding that position until November 1810, when he started over 3 years of retirement due to wounds. The cross of the Légion d'honneur (shown in the painting) was not awarded to de Schauenburg until July 1810.

Compare de Schauenburg in this work by Zix in 1800 :

And de Schauenburg in ~1840 :

On the right, there is shown a bearded rider in Bashkir head-dress turning to fire a pistol. The 1st through 4th Bashkir commands joined the main Russian forces facing the French on 24 May 1807, the only Native cavalry to participate in the 1805-1807 conflict with the French.
link

Of course, by 1814 French painters had seen all sorts of Russian Native cavalry. But by then de Schauenbourg was a chef d'escadron sous-chef d'état-major.

So, I think the painting was commissioned by de Schauenbourg in ~1811, with his uniform of 1807 as he recalled it. Just my guess.

For those who have Facebook, my group uniformingthepast has the author Paul Lindsay Dawson as a member. He posts his research and constantly answers any questions. Feel free to join.

Michael.

The discovery of uniform information from one primary source that is different from that conveyed by another primary source does not necessarily mean one source is right and the other is wrong. These are all potentially useful data points that can enhance our knowledge of the uniforms of a particular unit, but each piece of information must be carefully analyzed to arrive at conclusions about its reliability. For instance, inspection reports would seem to be a particularly good source of information, but one must ask as a preliminary matter the classic who, where and when questions, since a report arising from inspection of a regimental battalion or squadron in a particular location may not be particularly relevant information concerning the appearance of a different battalion or squadron of the same unit in another location. In addition, the exact terminology used in a report may be very significant, since different terms could be used by different inspectors to describe the same piece of clothing. Conclusory judgments about the reliability of proven primary sources without the accompanying analysis do not promote the best outcome for this type of discussion. Secondary sources (such as the work of modern writers and artists) only play a role to the extent that they provide a guide to or insight about relevant primary sources.

Mich,
I get where you're going, but wonder f not more anomalies?
First- "And de Schauenburg in ~1840"- well what is wrong? The plate or the label?
Was he ever a general? A quick look determines he died as a Colonel. For all I know that guy would be an Austrian officer. Seems a heck of a lot of clothing for Algeria?

Second- "The painting" – I've often thought this a marvelous painting of exquisite detail. Is it autobiographical? I'd doubt that or we'd know for sure from publicity about it. Unless it was hidden away in the family vaults for centuries.

Would an officer of modest accomplishments really do that? And why not just create a portrait? Seems inconsistent with the two B.Zix prints origins. And what happened to 'not being allowed' to transfer between services?

A dyed-in-the-wool (sic) elite Carabinier officer becomes a chasseur?? How common?? I'm sure desperation to advance wasn't that great that you compromised family tradition and principles. Or did they?

Third- "a bearded rider in Bashkir"- well whatever year, or misture of years are depicted, enemy are often shown as anachronistic individuals compared to the 'actual subject'. I won't argue the point, but I did read in some treatise on coassacks that their only formal armament were a pair of pistols. Perhaps the 'scene' depicted is one where enemy used them in close quarters, (as in they shoot and 'ride like the wind') to entrap following pursuers.

cheers d

PLD's work in surfacing swatches of actual material is very interesting. Based on these, aurore is simply a dark orange with no discernible pink in it; the steel blue worn by artillery drivers is just mid-blue, with no discernible grey in it; and so forth.

I'm less persuaded by the info about how many metres of this of that material the depot had and thus the unit must have worn that. It seems equally likely that the depots had what they were resupplied with and the troops wore something else made from whatever was previously in hand. The book may deal with this point somewhere but its layout is reader-unfriendly so I can't say.

The uniformology part of it really needs to be a spreadsheet rather than a book.

I agree with Sources2022.

=================

I liked the images just to allow people to evaluate the idea that the captain of the 5e chasseurs was de Schauenburg, as opposed to the painting being by de Schauenburg.

I actually linked a photo of a painting published by Antoine Meyer Photographie in Colmar in 1884.
link

The original was a watercolor painted from life in Africa in about 1835 (my "~1840" was a bad guess – I thought the painting was postumous). The original hung in the Musée Maréchal Franchet d'Espérey at the Casbah in Algiers in the years before World War 2. It as copied by Rousselot in 1930 for a set of cards/planches published by Bucquoy.

The collections of the museum were mostly repatriated in 1962 during a rather hasty evacuation. The pieces have since been scattered across many museums and collections. I do not know the fate of the original painting.
link

The baron de Schauenburg was indeed promoted maréchal de camp shortly before his death. I think that it may have been a field/theatre promotion not yet confirmed by the ministry by the time of his demise, and thus absent from some biographical notices.
link

=================

"Would an officer of modest accomplishments really do that? "

It is a rather naïve work, not a formal portrait. I think some one in or known to or close to his company or escadron arranged it or did it for de Schauenburg as a gift about the time of his retirement – perhaps a "going away" present at the end of 1810.

"'not being allowed' to transfer between services"
It was allowed, just uncommon. The more similar the branches/arms/services, the more common. The lower or the higher the rank, the more common. More common before/during/after being an aide de camp. More common after a long absence for wounds/illness or as a prisoner or on detached service. More common if you had "connections". Our man de Schauenburg fit into several of the "more common" categories. He only actually served with the carabiniers from August 1800 to July 1802.

21.X.1797 (age 13-1/2) sous-lieutenant au 14e demi-brigade légère aide de camp près de son père
4.VIII.1800 (age 16) passé sous-lieutenant au 2e régiment de carabiniers à cheval *
30.VII.1802 (age 18) promu lieutenant au 2e régiment de carabiniers à cheval aide de camp près de son père
30.IX.1805 passé lieutenant au 5e chasseurs à cheval
3.III.1807 promu capitaine au 5e chasseurs à cheval

* It would appear that the rule for aides de camp to be at least lieutenants was enforced on General de Schauenburg from mid-1800 to until his eldest son made lieutenant in Autumn of 1802, at the youngest possible age of 18 years old. It was similar for the younger brother, Joseph (1799-1807) – here painted by Zix in 1800, a 14 year-old sous-lieutenant in the 17e dragons. The General de Schauenburg tried (unsuccessfully) to get the Légion d'honneur for both aide de camp sons in the Summer of 1805.

"coassacks that their only formal armament were a pair of pistols"
No – they typically had uniforms and their formal armements were sabre and lance …. blue trimmed red for Don Cossack, blue trimmed white for Bug Cossacks, red & blue for Guard Cossacks, etc., etc., etc.
Anyway – I was calling attention to the very specific Bashkir (summer) cap. The first time anyone looking like that was sent against the French was late May 1807.

thanks Michman for your expertise, yes, and I also agree strongly with sources 2022, all sources, have to be seen in context and evaluated as that. As for the cavalry skirmish, L. Dawson would suggest that it would be 1805 there in 1807 the regiment did wear Spencers, however as Michman points out the summer cap of the Bashkir points to 1807 – and now what?

In addition to the Baskir cap, if we believe the captain in the left foreground to be de Schauenburg, he was promoted to that rank only in March 1807.

another 5e chasseurs – copied from Martinet ?

>>Did the inspector really write "kinski",

Yes I agree that such terminology is suspect and drawing conclusions from it, problematic.

I've noted in the context of the 'Guard Cavalry' book, in many texts the French word is often avoided (clear and concise AND understood) for an English 'transliteration' that in some cases, I've not seen before. Which is ironic given the source material… I think.

This may be a result of his occupation/ trade in uniforms, but again is far from helpful in a book full of dscriptions but not illustrated with callouts.

>>The book may deal with this point somewhere but its layout is reader-unfriendly so I can't say. <<

I think it is a reasonable stance to take academically- especially when one is awakened to the fact that 'la garde' DID IN FACT use an alternative yellow (dark) cloth for decoration IN ADDITION to pure aurore* decorations.

*That aurore (morning sun) is 'orange' and not 'pink' as many English writers shortened the 'salmon-pink' phrasing originally used isn't particularly new, merely a correction in the most positive way and timely. Although it was stated as 'scarlet' in a previous post.

However, I've found it immensely helpful in many ways, yet disturbing in elements of uncertainty. I guess we'll not see others doing the same due to the unique nature and strenuous depths required of it.

>>The captain shown to the left could be de Schauenburg, who was promoted captain in the 5th chasseurs in March 1807, holding that position until November 1810,<<

Was he promoted to the 1er Cie/ 1er Escadron (elite) as depicted by the colpack? Or is it that most [regimental] officers wore them?

One day I may expand my forces a little, and include this unit due to this unique descriptive illustration.
regards
d~

"Or is it that most [regimental] officers wore them?"

I do not know about "most" – but officers other than in the compagnie d'élite did wear them.

In our naïve painting, we have the colonel with white plumed colpak behind the captain and to the left. Claude Corbineau or Pierre Bonnemains ?

Portrait of General Bonnemains. I am taking a guess it is a portrait of him.

Colonel Pierre Bonnemains 5e Chasseurs a Cheval

Some interesting news from 'PLD's forthcoming titles including an unexpected topic who saw the light given past sanitary restrictions complicating visits to the Archives in France

Cavalry: thats 50% complete. The artist is working on the dragoons and then lancers and carabiniers. The light cavalry is 99% complete. So, I hope an end of year release for that depending on time scales. Ideally, a volume on the uniform of the French army in the Peninsular war will appear. My dream of a book on Essling wont happen, as British publishers wont took any Napoleonic subject without redcoats or Wellington as the interest is Britain V France rather than the war as a whole, and importantly what was being fought over, which goes far beyond nationalism: it was war fought by Britain not for national survival for but for the survival of privilige, the right to enslave the working man as I hope my forthcoming book demonstrates, but it wont win any applauds from British nationalists and Wellington lovers. Nor will the invasion book, as it looks at how Irish, English, Welsh and Scots worked hand in glove with the French to bring about revolution and invasion in their own country to cripple Britain, her empire and topple the monarchy and Pitt.

For those interested in the Napoleonic, my forthcoming book charts the relatively unknown story of the British Home Front of the time culminating in the Despard conspiracy which sought to establish a French style republic in England. We have forgotten how close Britain came to revolution and the strength of feeling against the government of Pitt. This book is a springboard to further studies from myself of the British Home front: one book will be an indepth review of the various attempts to invade England, Scotland and Ireland 1792-1815: centre stage in our study is Talleyrand, the United Irishmen figureheaded by Wolfe Tone, as well as his colleagues and collaborators from England, Scotland, Wales, Canada and America. Our second book will review of the volunteer forces exploring how they were more of a hinderance than a help in keeping peace at home.

Due for release over the summer from Pen & Sword inprint Frontline. Being followed by the invasion text. I have to chase down some loose ends on the 1811/1812 invasion attempt which feeds over into my forthcoming book on Luddism as both events were in essence the same thing. The French participation and also Irish element in Luddism of course being written out of history of Luddism. British history does not like to mention French soliders were on the streets of the West Riding directing the Luddites who were recruited from the Local Militia.
The first wave of Luddism in 1799/1800 seems to be have been backed by the French, as France was very well informed of the social unease in Britain at the time and sought to exploit it. The United Irishmen and United Welsh were certainly heavily involved in 1799/1800 and again in 1811/1812, so too the French who provided arms and money, as well as men on the ground.

I have been recently delving into the archives of the 3e Hussards to provide some hard facts about the dress of that regiment for a painting by keith Rocco. The first issue to address was, what colour uniform did the 3e wear? Knoetel, Rousselot and Ridley Scott all show the 3e dressed in grey; yet this is not the case. An extant pelisse for the 3e, a sabretache of a type used 1804-1807 and a set of cloth samples for the regiment issued by the French War Ministry show us that the famous gris argentin was not grey, but was in fact a melange fabric, which was light blue in overall appearance. I attach a detailed shot of the pelisse housed in the museum at Tarbes which is worth a visit for any student of the epoch. Secondly, it seems the elite company dispensed with sheepskin schabraques in favour of cloth schabraque cut in the manner of those used by the Lancers of the Garde Imperiale, complete with skeepskin seat. This should not come as a surprise as this form of schabraque was used by other regiments of hussars for the elite company. Another surprise came with the discovery that the pantalons a cheval were cut from cloth that was 'almost black' described as 'grey-black'. Lastly, some sources give the 3e Hussard sapeurs: not a single point of evidence from the epoch that I have been able to locate gives the regiment sapeurs. These details and more will be covered in my forthcoming publication on the line cavalry.

The 3e Hussards is one of the best documented regiments of Hussards for the 1e Empire from its own regimental archives. We like to imagine that the 3e wore traditional hussard dress during the 1806 and 1807 campaigns, yet archive documents present the image shown below. Following Eylau, the 3e had enw clothing issued and made whilst in cantonments. Rather than the dolman and pelisse, incame the sombre and highly practical surtout as full dress garment. Hussard had had surtouts since the 1802 regulation, and it made sense to dfispense with these in times of war, for somthing cheap, robust and simple to make. The 3e was not alone in adopting this dress: the 1e also wore surtouts by July 1807. An interesting note from the summer 1807 review is that the 3e had reinforced with culottes hongroise with leather to the inner leg to make then harderwearing and that the sabretache was made of leather with no other decoration than the regimental number. Again a common sense decision to dispense with a costly embroidered sabretache which needed a cover to protect the embroidery, which was again another cost that was not essential to the regiments clothing and equipment. Amidst all the cost cutting, one luxury for the regiment was madder red shako cords for the centre company, who wore black plumes in their shako. No doubt due to supply issues and costs, the shakos were unadorned with plates. When the 3e returned to France at the close of 1807, the regimental workshops were busy in February 1808 making dolmans, pelisse and more surtouts for campaign dress.

As we progres on our book concerning French Line cavalry, I think it is worth sharing a plate concerning the elite company of the 9e Hussard. Regimental archive reports that different ranks had different fur trim to their pelisse. Troopers had black sheepskin, corporals and trumpeters had white, and the sous-officers had grey fox fur. The regiment clearly purchased black and white sheep skins. The grey fox, would be artic or similar. Officers also had artic fox fur trim and not black sheepskin. This seemingly insignificant detail has been ommitted from reconstruction of this most famous of hussar regiments. The 9e is one of the best documented regiments after the 5e, and what we think we know about the dress of the 9e in many cases does not stand up to scrutiny. We are working on a release date in early 2023 we are editing the text and writing captions as quickly as we can. The cavalry book will have perhaps 1,000 illustrations in full colour and 150,000 words. It will be the defacto study.

Paul Lindsay Dawson

an other interesting post by PLD illustrating again his sentence already mentionned in this thread that 99% of representations of bands and drummers are TOTAL FICTION

30e de ligne

I thought – and I shall recieve no doubt negative comments – to share some current research on the 30e de Ligne. Rousselot, the Kneotel team of father and son, Rigo and many other artists all depict the head of column of the 30e de Ligne wearing scarlet coats faced black or very dark blue, based on the Wurtz collection of paper soldiers made decades after the end of the Empire. Unlike Rousselot et al, I do not consider this to be a primary source; the regimental archive of the 30e de Ligne has the final say. The archive does not disapoint when it comes to the dress of the 'tête de colonne'.Inspected on 27 July 1805 by General Tigny at Aix-la-Chapelle, he reports that the regiment had spent 177francs 30 dyeing white broadcloth and white serge – a fabric used to line the habits and face the tails- of the drummers, musicians and sapeurs bleu de ciel. The distinctly non period source shows a colour definately not sky blue. So we are dealing with habits with bleu de ciel facings and tails. So could the habits be scarlet? Well in a word no. In the production of 818 habits, 166m 90 of scarlet broadcloth was used, in the period August 1803 to October 1804, and to make790 habits October 1804 to July 1805, 138m 81 of scarlet broadcloth was used for collars, cuffs and piping. To make 64 habits for the drummers, sapeurs and musicians of the two war battalions would take 96m of scarlet broadcloth. Given the accounts record dyeing cloth bleu de ciel, they would record the purchase of additional scarlet cloth. Therefore, we are dealing, in all probability Imperial blue habits faced bleu de ciel. We also note every drummer was issued a giberne and banderole and also an AnXI light cavalry mousqueton. So is it possible this uniform existed at a later date? When inspected 26 November 1807 every man in the 30e de Ligne was still wearing a chapeaux. The musicians and drummers were still armed with firearms, and likely still dressed with bleu de ciel facings. The voltigeur companies had no chamois distinctions and the grenadiers still had no bearskins. Reviewed again 20 February 1808, again no bearskins, no chamois broadcloth and no epaulettes of any sort. So where does that leave us? The 30e were ordered to adop shakos in February 1808, and Christopher Suhr shows these in use by 1810 in the 'Petit Suhr' manuscript as well as grenadiers with bearskins and epaulettes and also voltigeurs with chamois collars. The regimental archive tells us the grenadiers did indeed have bearskins as we find in stores in 1815 '21 covers for bearskins in black oilskin' which interestingly were bought in 1813. So we can assume Suhr is reliable in that the grenadiers had bearskins. The 30e -like many other regiments -ignored Bardin regulation till summer 1814. Sadly, we are ignorant of the dress of the drummers and sapeurs as Suhr does not show them. However the regiments archive tells us the drummers from at least 1812 wore blue habits. In 1813 23 drummers habits adorend with livery -540m was purchased – were made. What pattern of lace the livery was we do not know, but it seems to have been applied to a standard fusiliers habit. I guess – not fact- that in 1813 the colonel ordered 'more of the same' to match the current drummers clothing, as the regiments threee battalions had rather more than 23 drummers! Six more drummers habits were made in 1814. In total each habit was adornd with 16m of lace, which indicates the sleeves were adorned with 7 chevrons, the collar, cuffs and revers being laced, the small of the back and pockets on the tails. We could assume these garments were like those of the 48e de Ligne preserved in Ingolstadt museum in Bavaria. I assume – not fact- that the drummers of the 30e were all dressed the same: it is a reasonable assumption based on the facts. Wurtz may be correct, but as we cannot verify his images with any written source from the period or anyother iconographic source – the Carl collection cited by many is not independant or of the epoch, as it is merely a collection of Wurtz paper soldiers – it remains speculation. Wurtz is not hard fact as to the dress of the 'tete du colonne' of the 30e de Ligne in 1810. In all reasonableness, these men could still be dressed in dark bkue faced sky blue. What we do know is, at Austerlitz the drummers of the 30e were not wearing scarlet coats. By 1812 the unform was blue, so IF – and it is a BIG IF- a scarlet habit could have existed between 1808 to 1812.

Paul Lindsay Dawson

…Drummers of the Line Infantry

Rather than these comments being lost, It makes sense to make a general post about tambours of the Infanterie de la Ligne.
Contrary to what re-enactors do, and artists depict the circular of 11 Fructidor Year XII, 29 August 1804, authorised drummers, fifers and musicians to carry a mousqueton and giberne. We know this order was carried out: for example the drummers of the 45e de Ligne had 48 mousquetons and gibernes in February 1808, like 90% of drummers in the Ligne. These weapons are described as An XI mousqueton in inspection returns. So if your a re-enactment drummer, you need a giberne, banderole and light cavalry firearm.
Now what did drummers wear? Despite their ubiquity, drummers figure seldom in contemporary iconography. Archive documents help up us fill in the huge gap in our knowledge of what was worn, which has been filled in popular imagination by artists like Boisselier and others. Archive documents present an answer. Drummer's habits seem to have been decorated with worsted lace. In the 64e de Ligne, the regimental standing orders preserved at SHD tells us‘21 March 1805. In the morning their will be delivered to the drummers and musicians their gibernes and porte-gibernes. They will be whitened. Tomorrow for the inspection of the Colonel, all ranks will wear grand tenue. The greatcoats will be rolled and placed on the haversacs in the manner of a portmanteau…the soldiers which act as fifers will be minus their muskets and gibernes. The muskets will be worn en banderole [i.e. slung over the shoulder on the musket sing ed] in the manner as the musketoons are carried. As this is not a grand parade the men will wear a white stock and grey gaiters. On '1 April 1805.. yellow worsted lace…will be sewn on the cuffs of the drummer's habits. It will also be carried on the collar and will encircle the swallow's nests.
So clearly the 64e had yellow Cul de De lace on the habits which carried swallows nests. As with the 30e de Ligne, we know many regiments spent considerable money on the 'tête de colonne', so much so Marshal Soult wrote to General Clarke in spring 1808 (preserved in the Preval papers at SHD) 'All regimental colonels, whether cavalry or infantry, think themselves authorized by custom to arbitrarily change the uniform of the drummer's, trumpeters, and musicians. There are some who, taking as their rule only their fancy, pass successively from one shade to another, and from a strange form to a ridiculous one. The same reproaches take place with regard to the headdress of the officers, often of that of the troop, and particularly for the plumes, pompons, & c.' In reply drummers were authorised to use 'a new pattern lace' applied 'as for the decree of 1 October 1786'. Coloured facings were to be abolished. Again this document can be found in the Fonds Preval at SHD. Nothing is known from archive sources till the War Minister ordered 23 May 1810 'the habits of drummers and trumpeters are to be laced with 2m 70 of lace 27mm wide, to be sewn onto the habit conforming to the decree of 1 October 1786.' Arguably, collar and cuffs, and no sleeve chevrons. At the same time, mousqueton and gibernes were removed. Again, this can be found in Fonds Preval. Martinet shows a drummer of th 3e de Ligne in 1810, and he has yellow lace to collar, cuffs and swallows nests, and white revers. Clearly, Martinet is showing a drummer with the 1810 regulation dress. So what of the 'new pattern lace'? This appears in the regiments archive of the 1er, 30e, 36e, 76e and 100e de Ligne, and based on extant garments the 48e. A drummers habit with exactly the same lace as used by the 48e, but sewn to a garment dating to c.1800 can be found in the reserves of the Musee de l'Armee. This habit has lace to the collar, cuffs and 7 sleeve chevrons. At the shoulder are scarlet epaulettes. So we are dealing with a lace pattern was already in use before 1808. Before Bardin, drummers habits had either yellow Cul de De lace, or more protoypically – archive evidence and 4 extant garments -a lace almost identical to the old Royalist Livery was in common usage. Coloured revers were abolished in theory in 1808 – yet of course the notorious wear out period would mean garments would be used till life expired – and lace harmonised to the same pattern. Therefore a drummer at Wagram would carry a mousqueton, bayonet and giberne, his habit would decorated with drummers livery, and he may have coloured revers. Certainly most regiments did not have distinctive facings for drummers, the 30e and 57e with bleu de ciel are a-typical. I wont give too much else away otherwise no one will want to buy my book on the dress of the Ligne when it is released.

Paul Lindsay Dawson

how can be hard and crual some historical revealations, we have to tell Adieu to the Nurse/Infirmiers stretcher bearers despotats Companies in unusual brown uniforms…

French Napoleonic stretcher bearers. A lot of confusion over this. The idea was presented by Baron Percy in a Projet d'Arette. By and large that is as far as the idea developed. In 1808, in theory, the army of Spain had companies of stretcher bearers: however, having been through every box of correspodence relating to the French armies in Spain from 1808 through to Talavera, nothing is mentioned at Army, Corps, Division or Brigade level. Again, having consulted every box of archives for the Ligne Infantry, again nothing. Therefore the conclusion is, the idea never developed. In September 1809 strecther bearers cum infirmiers were created in the Army of Germany to serve in military hospitals. This was codified in January 1810 which regularised their dress to be a bonnet de police, beige capote, white tricot gilet manche, triciot pantalons, and a pair of shoes. Their duties were to work in hospitals and ambulances.
We have to wait till a decree dated 11 February 1811 for the Army of Germany:
" There shall be attached to each regiment of infantry, line and light, two pieces of artillery, 3 or 4 pounders, three caissons, a field forge, an ambulance caisson, and a caisson to transport the papers of the regiment. These eight waggons always march with the battalion which carries the eagle of the regiment.
2. There shall be attached to each battalion a caisson to carry the infantry cartridges, a caisson for the bread, which, for the four battalions shall make eight caissons.
Title 2, Article 3. The sixteen vehicles are serviced, harnessed, and conducted by a company of cannoneers of the regiment."
Archive sources tell us that the regiments with artillery and ambulances was 'hit and miss'. The total knowledge of ambulances in the Ligne infantry is as follows:
A report entitled ‘l'artillerie regimentaire du 2eme Ligne' from 1811 states that the short habits – we assume for the drivers- had not yet arrived with the regiment, nor had the culotte de peau and boots as required. Instead, the drivers were dressed in infantry uniforms and allocated pantalons made from broadcloth. A second report from 2 January 1812 states that the short habits and blue vestes had arrived but not the boots, so pantalon de treillis and gaiters was userd for the drivers. The regiment we note had 1 ambulance, drawn by one horse.
Partial regimental accounts exist from 1812 for the 9e de Ligne purchased 44 pairs of boots and culotte de peau for the drivers.An additional 22 pairs of boots were purchased in 1813 for the drivers, ergo the regiment had battalion guns in 1813.
The 21e de Ligne battalion artillery was equipped with 4x 3-pdr field guns, 6x caissons, 5x infantry munition caissons, 1 field forge, 5 stores waggons, 1 ambulance, 1 wagon for rations. The regiment had 36 gunners, 50 drivers and 108 horses. The men were dressed as fusiliers, the drivers being issued bottes d'ecurie and culottes de peau.
48e de Ligne had 54 pairs of culottes de peau for the drivers, 193m of treillis to line the portmanteau of the drivers, 70m 36 of white worsted lace for the driver's portmanteau, and 54 pairs of boots. The regimental tailor produced 54 habits vestes, 54 gilets with no sleeves, 54 stable coats, 54 capotes made from beige broadcloth which had cost 5568francs for 696m, 54 bonnet de police made from 45m 25 of blue broadcloth costing 497fr 75. Some 1782m of bleu celeste broadcloth was purchased, along with 149m of dark blue broadcloth, 80m 46 of dark blue serge and 184m 68 of bleu de roi tricot. From this we assume the drivers habits were bleu celeste with imperial blue collar and revers, the tails were lined in bleu de roi . The gilets were no doubt bleu celeste. The men were equipped with standard infantry buff work and shakos. We have no details of the dress of the gunners, if they wore anything different to the rank and file infantry.
Just as the decree states, in reality based on archive records, in all cases the ambulances were driven by the regimental artillery, and who ever manned stretchers were dressed as their colleagues. No uniforms or special equipment. No brown uniforms faced red. Unless boxes of archives lay hidden at Shd that say anything else, then strecther bearers as concieved in popular imagination, depicted by re-enactors and modeled by war gamers companies, dont exist.

Never any stretcher bearers in the field with the army. The whole notion of brown faced red, is based on a single document, for a project that was never acted upon by Baron Percy. Stretcher bearers did not exist outside regular hospitals. At no stage do infirmiers etc appear anywhere in regimental records, brigade, division, corps etc records. They are part of the Service de Santé which is NOT party of army level medical indendance.

Paul Lindsay Dawson

snif

48e de Ligne […] Some 1782m of bleu celeste broadcloth was purchased, along with 149m of dark blue broadcloth, 80m 46 of dark blue serge and 184m 68 of bleu de roi tricot.

What is the difference between dark blue and bleu de roi ?

The Armée du Nord collapsed at Waterloo because it had little to no combat experience – the thesis of Commandant Trochu and Ardant du Picq are relevant here as is Joachim Ambert on the psychology of the French Army. As soon as one scrapes off the 'gloss and mythos' of the Armée du Nord, one sees that it was a fragile combat force that could basically fire its muskets and march in a column, and formation in Line was doomed to failure due to lack of training,…

I've enjoyed the uniform discussions, but Dawson's 'reason' for the Armée du Nord's collapse flies in the face of the evidence. Regardless of the 'mythos', lack of experience etc. etc. etc., the performance of the Armée du Nord during the Waterloo campaign was not one of a 'fragile combat force.' It certainly wasn't the army of 1805-07, or even 1812, but it was hardly 'fragile.' At Waterloo, a fragile army wouldn't have fought for nine hours straight after sleeping in the rain the night before. A fragile army wouldn't have stayed fighting when the Prussians showed up on the French right flank.

It is these sweeping generalizations sprinkled in among the details and uniform research that create mental speedbumps and doubts when the mantra has been 'hard facts' and 'research.'

It is this sort of thread that makes me think Peter Young had a point with his imaginations armies. I have painted my French 1809 forces, you can research what you like, they're not going to get repainted.