The Lancers of Berg (also part of the Guard) received their lances "in late 1809" according to von Pivka. The same author also states that the Lancers of the Vistula were already in existence in 1807 when the army of the Duchy of Warsaw was incorporated into the French army.

Quote from: Hertsblue on 10 June 2013, 08:28:50 AM
Lancers of the Vistula were already in existence in 1807 when the army of the Duchy of Warsaw was incorporated into the French army.

Vistula lancers were never part of army of Duchy of Warsaw nor this army was ever incorporated into the French army.
The origins of regiment can be traced in 1799. They were formed as part of Polish Legion in Italy (on Cisalpine republic's pay). Then it entered French army, later Italian, finally Neapolitan.
In 1807 it entered French service again and was attached to so called new Polish Legion - regiments formed from Polish deserters from Prussian service reinforced by Polish recruits, but on French pay, and destined to serve with French army.
Eventually Polish Legion was renamed Vistula Legion and under this name immortalized due to its deeds during Penninsula campaign.

Quote from: WeeWars on 08 June 2013, 01:58:29 PM
The Guard Grenadiers look splendid. But it's a shame they have their hat cords across the front of the busbies. Should be draped over the top of the busby.

I agree, bit of a disappointment. Can it be tweeked Leon?

I can understand how this has happened as everything I have found which describes the Gr-a-Ch uniform says the bearskin is like the foot grenadiers, which clearly it isn't. All the pictorial evidence shows that where cords are worn they either pass behind the plume or if in front come over the centre of the top of the bearskin.
ie http://www.napoleon-series.org/military/organization/frenchguard/sthilaire/c_sthilaire4.html

WeeWars, do you have a reference other than pictoral?


Cheers, Rob 

Quote from: Rob on 18 June 2013, 06:49:16 PM
WeeWars, do you have a reference other than pictoral?

"The two paintings together give a clear view of the straightforward arrangement of the single orange cap cord, which was braided for half its length then narrowed to a single strand ending in the free-floating raquettes. The braided end was anchored near the bottom of the left side of the cap and the middle of the cord was attached to the cap again just above the backpatch, at which juncture a separate tassel was also added."

Guy C. Dempsey on paintings from Otto Manuscript

The bearskin "was adorned with a fixed tassel of aurore-coloured wool placed high on the crown and falling towards the rear of the headdress; in addition, two laces, one placed close to the boss of the left chinstrap, the other high and to the right of the crown, served to secure the cord, which was held in place on the crown by the turning back on itself of the tassel cord.
   This cord, made from aurore-coloured wool and plaited along half its length, was terminated at the end of the unplaited portion by a raquette and tassel. Often the upper lace was left untied, so that the raquette hung down at the rear; it is in this manner that the head-dress is most often represented."

Lucien Rousselot

A Martinet print shows a Grenadier à Cheval officer with cords across the front of his bearskin, print of 'other ranks' not so. So the Pendraken officer could remain as is. As for the others, as I only need a few figures, I plan to put right the few I need.

Quote from: WeeWars on 19 June 2013, 11:43:39 AM
A Martinet print shows a Grenadier à Cheval officer with cords across the front of his bearskin, print of 'other ranks' not so. So the Pendraken officer could remain as is. As for the others, as I only need a few figures, I plan to put right the few I need.

Thanks for the refs Michael. There are also Funken, Bellange and Knotel pictures with the cord over the front of the beaskin. However they are from over the crown via a fixing in the centre, and not from the plume at the bearskin right side as depicted on the figures.

I dont know how difficult it would be to fix this sort of thing at this stage. I seem to remember a foot loading figure that was rejected at this stage, it seems years ago now, never to return, so perhaps we should just accept these minor things as the current figures are far far better than no figures.

Cheers Rob 

Quote from: Leon on 09 June 2013, 05:30:59 PM
As we expand the Napoleonic ranges, we'll be dropping the '1809' designation on the website I think, otherwise we'll end up relisting things which can be used in a new range, or having arguments over whether one code is enough or if it should be moved to a different range, etc.  If necessary, we can add rough timelines to the codes to indicate which period that can be used for.

This would be sensible, and leave you with a bit of wriggle room with certain troops types. This gave me an idea that may be useful. Expand the description of the figures to give newcomers a guide of when and where historically they were used.

For example:
"NPF1

Line/Fusiliers, march attack
With shako and long tailed jacket as used by the French from 1807/8 through to 1812 in Northern Europe and 1814 in Spain.
These figures are also suitable for use as Napoleon's Italian line infantry."

It would keep the forumn active too as I'm certain there would no shortage of knowledgeble people volunteering the descriptions for you.


Cheers, Rob 

Quote from: Rob on 23 June 2013, 02:53:22 PM
This would be sensible, and leave you with a bit of wriggle room with certain troops types. This gave me an idea that may be useful. Expand the description of the figures to give newcomers a guide of when and where historically they were used.

For example:
"NPF1

Line/Fusiliers, march attack
With shako and long tailed jacket as used by the French from 1807/8 through to 1812 in Northern Europe and 1814 in Spain.
These figures are also suitable for use as Napoleon's Italian line infantry."

It would keep the forumn active too as I'm certain there would no shortage of knowledgeble people volunteering the descriptions for you.


Cheers, Rob 

You'll need a much bigger catalogue though - especiallly as the audience will want the same for all the other periods.

Quote from: Rob on 23 June 2013, 02:23:05 PM
I seem to remember a foot loading figure that was rejected at this stage, it seems years ago now, never to return,

I'm sure I spotted him in the American Civil War range!

Quote from: Hertsblue on 24 June 2013, 09:05:24 AM
You'll need a much bigger catalogue though - especiallly as the audience will want the same for all the other periods.

I dont see why you would need a bigger catlg, there is plenty of space on the display page. Why would you need to do every range? The "customers" could provide the text (it would be fun) and also QA the results.

Quote from: WeeWars on 24 June 2013, 11:23:04 AM
I'm sure I spotted him in the American Civil War range!

Bring him back to the Napoleonic range! At the time there was some argument about the position of the musket, if I remember well. Far better to have a loader with a questionable musket position than no loader at all.

Quote from: Rob on 25 June 2013, 03:47:19 PM
I dont see why you would need a bigger catlg, there is plenty of space on the display page. Why would you need to do every range? The "customers" could provide the text (it would be fun) and also QA the results.

Adding an average of three lines to each entry would triple the number of pages required for the Napoleonics section.

Adding descriptions to other periods would be as helpful to potential customers as they would be to Napoleonics buyers. Why should Napoleonics be the only recepient? Or put it another way, if you do one you have to do them all. Your fifty-page catalogue then becomes one hundred and fifty pages long.

Quote from: WeeWars on 24 June 2013, 11:23:04 AM
I'm sure I spotted him in the American Civil War range!

Ah Ha! Is it the same scupltor?
If that is the case does that mean we are are more likly to be succesful if we request a pose from one range that is not in the other? Such as the cavalry with carbine as mounted skirmishers?

Quote from: Rob on 26 June 2013, 12:37:43 PM
Ah Ha! Is it the same scupltor?

Yes. Spot the difference:

Quote from: Hertsblue on 26 June 2013, 11:48:15 AM
Adding an average of three lines to each entry would triple the number of pages required for the Napoleonics section.

Adding descriptions to other periods would be as helpful to potential customers as they would be to Napoleonics buyers. Why should Napoleonics be the only recepient? Or put it another way, if you do one you have to do them all. Your fifty-page catalogue then becomes one hundred and fifty pages long.

Woh! Lots of negative vibes Ray!

Not sure why we are having this conversation as it is only we 2.  The idea seems to have absolutely no interest elsewhere as it has been resoundingly ignored      therefore anything we are saying is moot.

I think we may be at cross purposes as I suspect you are describing the catalogue that Leon emails to us, where as, I am referring to the website descriptions of the figures.

What was in my mind was to assist potential buyers and casual browsers to see a wider employment of what initially might seem a restricted time or geographic range or vice-versa to show there are some historical restrictions they may want to take account of.

Other examples would be the 1809 French Guard Chevauleger armed only with a sword which can be used in an 1810-15 Guard Chevauleger-Lancier unit as a rear rank figure,
Or,
As a vice-versa "Becker's" AFVs that had a combat history restricted to 6th June '44 to the end of August '44 and geographically to Normandy as part of the fascinating 21st Panzer.

This is all part of my personal crusade to block the club "pain-in-the-A***" from uttering (in his sqeaky no-it-all voice) "You do realise of course....."

Cheers, Rob 

Perhaps an alternative option would be to open one or more threads in a relevant place of forum for alternative uses of figures? For the online catalog pictures seem the more pressing priority (although the Nap range is doing pretty well on that front)

Just to chime in on the extra info discussion, for the printed catalogue, a simple date range would have to be it I'd think, as we don't have the space in the catalogue.  So it'd be the code, description, and then (1809-1915), etc.  On the website, we can add more info, but I think there is a character limit which I'd have to check on.

Leon.

If your idea of a holiday is posting on this forum, then you're even sadder than I am.

Go and watch a sunset, enjoy a meal out with your family, paddle in the ocean. The world will not collapse if you leave us to our own devices for a week.  Well, I'm reasonably sure the world won't end if you leave us to our own devices for a week. Say 85%?

Take a proper break man, and leave the forum alone. Then when you come back refreshed and reinvigorated, you can get the Centurion in the catalogue.

<Centurion now placed one shelf higher in the casting dungeon>

I haven't gone yet unfortunately!  We fly on Saturday afternoon, so you'll have to put up with me for a little longe.

On the subject of 1809 sculpts that got away, I bumped into this pic in a 2010 post on another forum.



Goes with: