Difference between 1809 and 1812 figure ranges.

[Last Hussar]

Am I allowed to say 'about three years' yet?

Yes

[Duke Speedy of Leighton]

About three years! 

[John Cook]

Whilst technically correct from an authenticity perspective, every range I can think of takes the position of issue dates being absolute. Which from a production standpoint is fine and actually less confusing. 1809 French in long tail habits, 1812 in short tail habits. The buyer can choose which they want and which campaign to use them for.

Merely answering the question from Last Hussar.  Something is either right or it is not.

[John Cook]

Does the 1809 stuff work for Austerlitz

No, not at all.  The French line infantry did not have shakos in 1805 but bicornes..

[Zippee]

Merely answering the question from Last Hussar.  Something is either right or it is not.

I don't think it's as simple as that. You have an axis with a campaign look authenticity at one end and a by the book full dress look authenticity at the other. We see that all the time in wargames collections where figures are in full dress not campaign motley and it is absolutely the individual's choice which point on that axis they choose. Issuing an 1812 range dressed in the official uniform as decreed for that year isn't incorrect just because real life logistics meant it didn't achieve immediate service use.

A figure dressed in Bardin regulation uniform for 1812 is 'correct' by the regulations, one dressed in a variant of c1809 uniform is also 'correct' by the likely standard of issue, and one dressed in trousers and greatcoat with some kind of wrap on his head is 'correct' by the standards of campaign conditions. And the likely reality is a bewildering mixture of all those and everything in-between.

I agree it's important to understand the difference if you want a full understanding of the situation but I think it would be disingenuous for a figure manufacturer to release an 1812 range of French figures that were not in Bardin issue without specifically calling them out as such.

Figure ranges need to be clearly tagged as to what they represent and tying them to issue dates seems a more logical and coherent methodology than to some vagary of what might have been being worn at some point by any number of different units over a period of years.

That said I think that there should also be reasonable availability of campaign dress figures, which by definition would be an attempt to reflect the snapshot of the real situation for those who wish to reflect that in their model armies. The wargame table reality, however, seems to be that such figures are far less popular (and thus economical) than those sporting some semblance of official full dress regalia - the hobby after all is at least as much about visual impact on the table as it is about understanding of historical realities.


FWIW my 1809 French are reasonably accurate by the regulations but probably a very poor representation of reality - like the vast majority of wargames collections out there. And whilst they could be pushed to be used in 1812, they are not suitable for 1805 or 1815. Although naturally enough they get lumped on the table whenever some Napoleonic French are needed.

French Ligne 1809 - 105th Regiment, Battalion I 03 by Zippee Jerred, on Flickr

[paulr]

Well said & I would happily use those French in any Napoleonic game

[Last Hussar]

About three years! 

Cheers, thanks for clarifying.

Seriously, I like Zipper's answer. Not just (year), but noting what it could be representative of.

[John Cook]

Very nice.  They are perfect for the Russian 1812 Campaign too.  Even the eagle and colour.

[Shutuphippie]

Does anyone have pictures of the 1812 range?  So specificially the French?

[John Cook]

Cheers, thanks for clarifying.

Seriously, I like Zipper's answer. Not just (year), but noting what it could be representative of.

To summarise, up until 1813 the line infantry kept in the main part, the blue uniform they wore at the start of the Empire, essentially as described in October 1801 – blue coats (habits) and bicornes.
 
In  April 1806, however, a decree stated that the infantry would in future be dressed in white coats and in July the text describing the new coat was published. Nineteen regiments were designated to be the first to receive the white coats in 1807, but the 1807 campaign demonstrated that the colour was not practical and the change was dropped and blue coats were retained.  Although decreed in 1806, no regiments wore white coats during the 1806 campaign and it is far from certain which regiments actually received them for the 1807 campaign. 

The bicorne was replaced by a shako by decree of February 1806 and a description published in March of the same year but the line infantry continued to wear the bicorne throughout the 1806 campaign.  The shako was introduced army-wide in 1807. 

After 1806 the shako became the universal wear for the line infantry.  This remained the situation until 1813 – blue coat with shako.

The text to the so-called Bardin regulations appeared in parts throughout 1812, first in February 1812 and finally in November 1812.  It is clear that the new uniforms were to be issued initially to the conscripts of 1813.  We know, nevertheless, from various sources that stocks of the old uniforms continued to be issued during first six months of 1813 and were worn into 1814.

Clearly these new so-called Bardin uniforms, the description of which was not disseminated fully until November 1812, could not have been issued and worn in Russia. 

So, the old uniform, with long habit and bicorne was worn from the start of the Empire, and before, until the end of the 1806 campaign.  It continued to be worn, with the shako replacing the bicorne, during the campaigns of 1807, 1809 and 1812, and throughout the campaigns in the Spanish Peninsular from 1808 to 1813.

The 1812 uniform was initially issued to conscripts in 1813 from about August 1813 and gradually replaced the old uniform from that time but the old uniform continued in use.  The 1812 uniform was not in universal use until 1815.

Now, you can choose what figures you like to represent whatever period you are playing, but I suggest that you wouldn't use a late war variant Sherman in a 1942 scenario based around the 8th Army in North Africa, but it isn't a hanging offence if you do.

I hope this helps.

[John Cook]

Very nice.  They are perfect for the Russian 1812 Campaign too.  I should have said except the eagle and colour.

[Westmarcher]

In 1812 the French see a big change under the Bardin reforms.

This sees the loss of the:
Lozenge style eagles and the introduction of the tricolour
Long thigh length infantry gaiters replaced by shorter knee height ones
Coat with big lapels goes and replaced by the song,e fronted coat with shorter tails and turn backs
Line Grenadier companies are officially stopped from wearing the bearskin - shakosf for all now
Line voligueur coys are officially stopped from wearing the colpack - sharks for all

They wore fish on their heads?

[FierceKitty]

Only when on sentry duty at the Eel de France.

[mollinary]

Only when on sentry duty at the Eel de France.

And on Best Eel Day!

[Duke Speedy of Leighton]

Cod! Here we go again!