"Wurttemberg artillery, uniforms" Topic

Hello all. You have previously helped me out on wurttemberg uniforms so I will now try again.

Conserning the horse artillery of the 1809 campaign.

1) Black or blue lapels? The contemporary artist Seele shows them with blue lapels (as shown on page 46 in the newer David Wright issue of "Wurttemberg – Cavalry, Artillery and Staff of the Napoleonic Wars" where he notes in the picture text that regulations would have them black. Stadlinger shows them black, Knötel shows them blue. What have you relied on when painting them?

2) All illustrations I have found depicts them with blue trousers and black boots. Is it not likely that on campaign (when marching and being engaged in compat) grey trousers would have been worn, showing only the foot part of the boots?

3) David Wright in his "The wurttemberg army in the campaign onf 1809" writes in text (p. 30) that both of the mounted batteries were part of the garde battery (or Maison du Roi) – however in the rest of the book he seems only to use the "maison du roy" concerning the 1st battery – any thoughts on this?

Cheers,
Magnus

1. According to Rawkins the horse artillery wore black lapels until 1811 when these were changed to blue – see extracted text below:

"The line horse artillery companies were issued with a cavalry pattern tunic with demi-lapels and very short tails. The coatee was light blue with collar, lapels and cuffs black and the turnbacks yellow with black tape edging. The cuffs were of the squared pattern with two buttons one on the cuff actual and one above at the trailing edge. In 1805 the shoulders were decorated with plain black shoulder-strap but these were replaced in 1806 with scaled contra-epaulettes with black felt underlay. All buttons were brass. The horse artillery wore a black kummerbund sash over the coat until this was official withdrawn in 1811 but contrary to regulations appears to have been worn through 1812. In 1811 the lapels were changed to light blue with yellow piping and the new coats issued in 1813 to the reconstructed companies were the same except that the turnbacks were now black with yellow piping."

"The Garde Artillerie zu Pferd company received a coat in 1808 of the same pattern as worn by the line artillery light blue with black collar, cuffs and lapels and yellow turnbacks with black edging. All buttons were changed to white metal and the button holes on the lapels were decorated with white lace tasselled litzen. The collar was decorated with two horizontal bars of tasselled lace and the square cut cuffs with two vertical laces. The shoulders were furnished with white metal scaled contra-epaulettes with black felt underlay. In 1811 a new coat was issued with only a single baton of litzen on the collar and the collar and lapels were now piped yellow. New uniforms were issued in 1813 which were the same but had light blue lapels piped
yellow and black turnbacks piped yellow."

2. "The horse artillery wore light blue breeches with plain topped black leather boots. In 1805 the breeches were decorated with yellow Hungarian knots on the thighs but this appears to have been discontinued by 1807. In 1811 both the line and guard companies of horse artillery received an issue of mid-grey overall trousers for wear during campaign with black leather inserts and cuffs. In 1813 the guard company appears to have received new dark grey overalls of a very tight fitting cut with black leather inserts and trim from the cuff to the knee."
Your surmising on foot wear may well be correct but I have no definitive information.

3. According to "Das Koniglich Wurttembergische Heer 1806-1871" by Herbert Hahn two horse artillery batteries were part of the Guard from January 1808. However other sources appear to support just the 1st Horse Artillery Battery being regarded as part of the Guard.

Here is the Histofig plate:

Thanks a lot!

Great information. Is the Rawkins information from the book "ARMIES OF BADEN & WURTTEMBURG 1806-1814" at sale at Caliver?
Seems like this might be a good investment.
link

Really good information on the breechers also – thanks!

New question conserning the artillery. My information is from the works of David Wright. I find it at bit difficult to interpret the mounting of the mounted artillery. How I understand artillery it thought that one difference was that the gunners of foot artelleri walked or rode on the cannon/limper while the gunners of horse artellery had horses.
Wright writes (p. 30) that for each gun only six artillerymen (out of about 13) were mounted. I guess that the rest (along with the trainsoldiers, medical staff, craftsmen ect, would ride on canon/limber, (maybe the same as for foot artillery)?.

I have a bit difficulty visualizing how everyone was transported then. A horse artellery battalion has 6 guns and 154 men (including soldiers, gunners ect). 36 of the gunners rode their own horse leaving 118 men in total to be transported by other means. Each gun could seat 4 (two on canon, two on limber), and each gun had a munition wagon with a limber (so 2 on the limber and possibly 2 on the wagon it self?). Combinng this each gun, with limbers and munition wagon could transport 8, totalling 40 for the battery (8*6) + the 36 on the horses = 86. how were the remainn 154-86 = 68 men transported?

The only place where I have seen the seeting on canon / limber / munition visualized is on the "fransnap" link

And what separetes the horse and foot artillery if only some of the artillerymen had horses. Does the difference lie more in that the canons and munition wagons had 6 instead of 4 horses and not so much in the transportation of the crew??

Rawkins info taken from the CD – I still have some reservations re the book. In my view, it would be far better for the CD to be reissued at a slightly higher cost than charged by Rawkins, rather than have a hugely curtailed edition of both CDs! Moan over!

Will post later re the artillery as I am still going through a couple of books. You may not be surprised that there are some differences which I need to clarify.

Rawkins has the following (but see other views afterwards):
Horse Artillery Company Establishment 1808-1814
1 Hauptmann
1 Oberleutnant
1 Unterleutnant
1 Feldwebel (Sergeant from 1809)
1 Quartiermeister
1 Chirurg (Surgeon)
7 Korporal
2 Trompet
1 Wagenmeister (Stabswachtmeister)
1 Hufschmied (Farrier)
1 Unterartz (Assistant Doctor)
1 Krankenführer (Surgeon's Orderly)
3 Handwerksmeister (Armourer, Wagon maker, Blacksmith)
4 Offiziersdiener (Officers' servant)
44 Trainsoldaten (Train soldiers)
12 Oberkanoniere
72 Kanoniere (48 until May 1808)

Hauptmann to Oberkanoniere would most likely have been mounted.

Horse companies with six light 6 pdr field guns and two 7 pdr howitzers, with six munitions caissons and one field forge. The guns had a ‘wurst' seat which could be fitted over the trail and seated four gunners back to back instead of astride as for the Austrian pattern.

Therefore if we assume 6 horses to draw each gun and howitzer = 8 x 6 = 48 of which half would be ridden by train soldiers (24 men).
If we assume 6 horses per caisson = 6 x 6 = 36 of which half ridden by train soldiers (18 men).
If we assume 4 horses for the forge, again half ridden by train soldiers *2 men)..
Allowing the wurst used for guns & howitzers 8 x 4 = 32 gunners plus 8 x 2 = 16 on limbers (48 in total), leaves 24 gunners mounted separately (so add in the Oberkanoniere) you get to your 36.

This differs from pages 620-621 in L. J. Stadlinger's "Geschichte des württembergischen Kriegswesens von der frühesten bis zur neuesten Zeit" link This has in 1809 for each horse battery:
1 Hauptmann
1 Oberleutnant
1 Unterleutnant
1 Sergeant
1 Quartiermeister
7 Korporal
2 Trompeter
12 Oberkanoniere
72 Artilleristen
2 Wagenmeister
45 Trainsoldaten (Train soldiers)
1 Unterartz (Assistant Doctor)
1 Krankenführer (Surgeon's Orderly)
3 Handwerksmeister (Armourer, Wagon maker, Blacksmith)
4 Offiziersdiener (Officers' servant)

Each battery had four 6pdr cannon & two 7pdr howitzers, supported by four munitions caissons and one field forge.

"Napoleonic Artillery" by Anthony L. Dawson, Paul L. Dawson & Stephen Summerfield (pages 91 to 95) says until 1799 the horse artillery battery had 8 pieces (four 6 pdr cannon & four 7pdr howitzers). The four 6pdr cannon were supported by 2 wurst wagons & 1 caisson, while the howitzers were supported by 1 wurst wagon & 1 caisson. (Note the wurst wagons were abandoned in 1803). The battery needed 131 horses (including 2 for the trumpeters). Between 1803 & 1810 Wurttemberg followed the Prussian all mounted system; whereas from 1810 onwards they used the Hanoverian system (semi-vehicle mounted).

Typically Strack von Weissenbach's "Geschichte der Königlich Württembergischen Artillerie" pages 134 et seq. link has some slightly different figures for the number of personnel….

Although later than the Napoleonic period (circa 1860) this gives a good idea of how Wurttemberg field artillery moved (i.e. gunners etc mainly on foot):

Thank you very much!

Are the rawkins CD available and in English? If not I will go for the condensed reprint:)

Very nice that the numbers somewhat adds up – thank you. And I appreciate that diferent sorces gives slightly different compositions but in general term I get the following out of it: It seems fair to say then that for horse artelleri gunners were either on the canon/limber/wagon or on horseback while foot artillery gunners were either on canon/limber/wagon or on foot?

Then the difference in speed and agility between mounted and foot artillery – is do to a combination of no one needing to walk and of the guns and limbers having 6 instead of 4 horses (in mounted artillery).. Makes sense to me.

What is meant be the line in your post stating that "Between 1803 & 1810 Wurttemberg followed the Prussian all mounted system;… "

And thank you for the link. I had the 11 pages on the artillery engagements in 1809 campaign translated. It is to large to append here I think but if anyone non-german speaking out there is interested just send me your email and I will email it too you.

You may be interested in this post Napoleonic item "Exercir-Vorschrift für die königlich würtembergische Artillerie" Author/Contributor: König Wilhelm I. Württemberg, Stuttgart 1824-1835 This comprises 5 Volumes of Text & 2 volumes of diagrams (all in a single download totalling 450.65MB) PDF link
The diagrams give an excellent overview on both horse & foot artillery batteries (though in this case showing 8 pieces for the horse) with their supporting caissons etc, where personnel were positioned etc.

Unfortunately the Rawkins CDs (are in English) are no longer available for purchase unless any come up for sale on e-bay or similar.

What is meant be the line in your post stating that "Between 1803 & 1810 Wurttemberg followed the Prussian all mounted system;… " The Dawson, Dawson & Summerfield book says:
"In the Prussian system, all the members of the battery were mounted. The teams of horses used to pull the guns had an additional pair, to increase the ability of the battery to accompany the movements of the cavalry……..Paradoxically, although the fully mounted artillery was quicker to reach its position, it was slower to get into action. The horse-mounted crew memebers had to find a safe spot to dismount before arriving at their position, but could not leave their horses until the guns were in the correct position and the horse-holder had jumped down from the limber to takeover their reins. When limbering up again, the guns had to wait until the crew had mounted again and the horse-holder was once again seated on the limber….."
Under the Hanoverian system half the crew were vehicle mounted which meant guns could be brought into action quicker.

Thank you. I interpret "mounted" here as including 1)being on a horseback and ") riding on canons/limbers.

Then it still comply then with my interpretation that for horse artelleri gunners were either on the canon/limber/wagon or on horseback while foot artillery gunners were either on canon/limber/wagon or on foot. Let me know if you disagree:).

I had read something similar concerning that horse artillery was not as fast and agile in compbat as might be generally thought. Interesting!

Thank you very much for your help so far. How come you have all this information – do you produce formal material on the subject yourself?

How come you have all this information – do you produce formal material on the subject yourself?

I have been interested in Napoleonics for nearly 60 years – god that really dates me! Intially the Waterloo Campaign – so collected lots of Hinton Hunt figures, which have now all gone. Interest over time widened to all combatants over the Napoleonic (and a lesser extent Revolutionary) Wars – uniforms, then how armies & their units were organised etc etc. The latter is what I limited myself to producing in small scale.

Thanks to the internet, and the digitisation of so many books (an ongoing process) that we had no access to, it has been possible over the last 10 to 15 years to build up a very substantial digital library. In no part helped by luminaries like Steve H. Smith, Dave Hollins, John Gill, Kevin Kiley, Enrico Acerbi, Virgilio Ilari, Piero Crociani, John Elting, George Nafziger and many, many more with pointers and links to a host of material. Also combing the internet for information on a particular well defined topic & not stopping at the first page of results (often I have delved down to page 7 or more as sometimes the real nuggets are hidden away). I have extensively utilised foreign language sites to get a non Anglo-Saxon perspective on things – often leading to further links to excellent material.

It is frightening to think how much material I have been able to download – am now looking for a very large capacity SSD drive to consildate my various hard drives and enable retrieval of relevant information a bit quicker.

Of course, I have purchased many books over the years too.

Magnus & PoE

Apologies for joining the thread late and thanks for the useful info/links.

Page 260 of "Napoleonic Artillery" referenced above and The Smoothbore Ordnance Journal Issue 2 help to shed some more light on this.

From Napoleonic Artillery – "The Wurttemberg M1808 Wurst ammunition wagon, based on the French caisson, carried 104 rounds, and half the lid had a padded Wurst seat…In both foot and horse artillery two gunners could ride on the carriage on top of the padded tool box. In theory two more could be mounted on the limber, and in the horse artillery the rest of the gun crew were mounted on the caisson."

From the Smoothbore Ordnance Journal (p81) – "In 1808, Oberstlieutenant von Kerner built a new pattern of ammuntion wagon; it consisted of a limber and a rear section, which could be unlimbered, and which held 104 cartridges. These wagons were issued to the 6-pdr guns of the HA in 1809."

Hope this helps

Thanks 1809andallthat

Wurttemberg artillery & ammo wagons including illustrations see "Weissenbach's History of the Royal Württemberg Artillery – Organisation and Equipment 1734-1815," Smoothbore Ordnance Journal, Issue 2 (07) [Translated by Digby Smith] PDF link and "Scale Models of Wurttemberg M1809 Field Ordnance,"
Smoothbore Ordnance Journal, Issue 2 (08), [John Cook and Stephen Summerfield] PDF link
For limbers see towards the end of "Wuerttemberg Workshop Ehmke 1812 – 1815" – from Napoleon Online – Informationsportal zur Epoche 1792-1815 PDF link