- 25/02/2016 at 01:27 #38720
Okay, new name to identify the conversation/stream of consciousness. Finally got back to this after the holiday break. Looked at what LPK had to say about the later old Leib-garde regiments. Something new – apparently they did not change the cartridge pouch badge in 1808. They still kept the double-eagle with the 4 grenades in the corners. Sharpen your brushes!
I see the boys over at TMP are agog with von Winterfeldt’s cut and paste of Robert Woo’s translation of Ulyanov’s info on Russian muskets. Good stuff, but that’s why I included it on my page zaotlichiye.net63.net/allfacings.html – Like B.A. says, I tend to ruin everyone’s fun.
25/02/2016 at 08:56 #38726Guy FarrishParticipant
- This topic was modified 5 years, 8 months ago by Jonathan Gingerich.
Okay, first time I’ve looked at your ‘page’ properly.
Thank you and although I think there is far more there than I could ever want (I’m doing 6mm armies!) it is so absorbing just in and of itself.
(works on IE11 if not 9 by the way!)25/02/2016 at 11:21 #38738
Thanks for the continuing updates on your page. It is a wonderful resource.
I wonder if I could pick your brains on the subject of Russian sappers? I’ve got some Minifigs 15mm Russian sappers that I would like to paint up and base but I am not really sure what to do with them. They are dressed as late-war line infantry and the only thing that really distinguishes them is that each of them has a spade slung over his left shoulder. Would these be appropriate to use as the Leib-Garde Sapper Regiment?
Also, napolun.com http://www.napolun.com/mirror/napoleonistyka.atspace.com/Russian_guard.htm says that they were classified a jagers but wore white leather carbine and pouch belts and white trousers in the winter. Is this correct?
Finally, do you happen to know if standards were issued to this regiment?
Stephen25/02/2016 at 18:14 #38745
The Leib-garde Sappers were equipped the same way the line was. The usual guard distinctions, more like the artillery, I’d say. The pants are a bit tricky. I believe that the line pioneers always wore gray, and the sapper regts, line and guard, wore d.green. But Viskovatov seems to illustrates white. (And I just caught a typo in Conrad – in 1816 the line pioneers changed to d.green from gray. I think that seals it – always gray.) The biggest issue is that they all used a big honking white leather bucket holster on a cross belt over the right shoulder (holster on left). Now the line were scheduled for dragoon muskets in place of pistols, but that never happened, although you could fudge it.
There is a bit of a disconnect about the L-g Sappers flag, as Viskovatov discussed the color of the pole in an 1819 entry, but mentions a flag only in 1824. But as it’s all long after the Wars, I’ve never bothered to look further.25/02/2016 at 18:55 #38748
It sounds like I don’t need to worry about the flag.
With the line sapper battalions in 1813 is the only distinction between the sapper and miner companies the colour of the pompoms?
Have I misunderstood or were they only armed with pistols and swords? I have seen a mention of the Lieb-Garde Sappers fighting at Liepzig. Did they do this just using side arms?
My figures are carrying muskets with bayonets attached so maybe they would be better sprinkled in a regular line battalion as troops who have been issued with entrenching tools.
Thanks again for your help
Stephen25/02/2016 at 19:38 #38749
LPK couldn’t find any official word on the pompons for either the pioneer or sapper (sappers and miners) battalions in the late period. So you are pretty safe doing whatever. I suppose they had different equipment if they ever actually did sapping or mining…
Don’t know about Leipzig – confusion with Guard Equipage? Maybe you have discovered something.26/02/2016 at 00:58 #38754
The reference to fighting at Liepzig came from ‘Russian Officer Corps of the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars’ by Alexander Mikaberidze https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=j2BwBPz4QFQC&pg=PA116&lpg=PA116&dq=russian+leib+guard+sapper&source=bl&ots=4sE7e1Vhzq&sig=zENinwj2IRKVVkSXgXulczMpAm8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwirgM2I4JLLAhUEOxQKHabvC1YQ6AEINzAE#v=onepage&q=russian%20leib%20guard%20sapper&f=false
It refers to a Sapper battalion taking part in the fighting though I suppose this may in fact be referring to building earthworks rather than directly involved in combat.26/02/2016 at 18:02 #38800
So I looked at what LPK had to say about the L-g. Sapper. It’s just one page, so I had it OCRed and translated this morning. A further distinction – shako cords were white rather than red as the artillery and line pioneers. Will have to add that to my page…
27/02/2016 at 07:02 #38841
- This reply was modified 5 years, 8 months ago by Jonathan Gingerich.
I must confess I’m stumped by the pants of the artillery. Viskovatov says they took the common white winter and summer pattern at the end of 1807, then 7 months later, white cloth was replaced with gray, and about a year after that they get unpiped dark green winter pants. He seems to illustrate white summer pants throughout. There is some possibility that “cloth” is distinguished from linen, but why not just say “gray winter pants”?
LPK seem to say that they never got the common pattern, but took gray pants with leggings and buttons, then the dark green winter pants.
Gabayev says in 1812 they had common white linen summer pants and the usual winter pants in dark green.
Seems like a lot of fuss for pants worn 3 months of the year – presumably… A darker color would certainly make sense for the sooty job…
So, Viskovatov says, maybe ambiguously, gray summer pants, and illustrates white. LPK don’t mention a summer pattern at all, and Gabayev says white. What a dilemma…27/02/2016 at 13:27 #38846
Thanks for the further information on the Lieb-Garde Sappers. It would be interesting to know where the napolun.com site got the information that they were classified as jagers. And I suppose that the even if they were classified as light infantry it doesn’t necessarily mean that they were employed as such.27/02/2016 at 16:32 #38850
I suspect that comes from the brigading. You have 6 grenadier regiments – 3 originals, Lithuania, Pavlovsk and the Grenadier, with the Jaeger, the Finland, and then the Equipage and Sapper battalions acting as a third auxiliary.27/02/2016 at 22:46 #38860
Thanks Jonathan. That sounds like a reasonable explanation. Mind you it leaves me wondering what to do with my figures because I don’t think they are right for sappers after all.28/02/2016 at 05:57 #38861
I realized there was a section in LPK on the overall uniform reforms in the second era (1807-14). It includes 3 pages on the new pants. While it doesn’t explicitly answer the question, the summer pants are described as Flemish linen, widely distributed, and no mention of them being anything other than white. So white it is, I guess. Now I’m wondering when each pattern was worn – by date, or by circumstance…26/03/2016 at 06:58 #39903jannerParticipant
Thanks again for all your hard work in putting your page together, Jonathan.
Might I just ask, in all your research have you come across anything relating to Russian Hussar regiments distinguishing their battalions (or squadrons) by the colour of pompoms c.1812. I’ve come across vague references to troopers of the first battalion having white pompoms and those of the second, red, but nothing concrete.
http://jannersjaunt.blogspot.dk26/03/2016 at 17:41 #39921GreystreakParticipant
I’m also interested in the answer to Janner’s query, as I’ve seen similar ‘vague’ information regarding hussar pompon colours. Further, where most line hussars appear to be portrayed with pompons matching the shako cord/lace colour (e.g. O.K. Parkhaev’s plates), the Guard Hussars have yellow outer rings and red centres ?
Bryce Allen26/03/2016 at 17:44 #39922
I have not, and I have been on the lookout, because the Russians seemed to be fairly, uh, Teutonic about those kind of details. Early on they distinguished them with white or red cords on the militron, and for a while I thought the “red and white” cords of the middle period might have been all white or all red by battalion, but this is not the case. The actual timeline of the switch to white, yellow, or red pompons and cords seems to be a bit vague, too.
Just got through the L-g. Jaeger and Finland sections of LPK. Not too much of import, but it does look like the L-g. company drummers had much more extensive lace than their line counterparts. Haven’t looked at the early L-g. section where it’s probably discussed.26/03/2016 at 20:49 #39925
Bryce, missed your post as I was replying. Yes, AFAIK the L-g. Hussar stayed that way. The Lancers went through a couple changes in the same period, so it’s a bit suspect.
Mirliton, mirliton, mirliton – must learn to spell.27/03/2016 at 09:06 #39937jannerParticipant
Thank you for responding Jonathan and a Happy Easter to you and yours
http://jannersjaunt.blogspot.dk22/04/2016 at 23:46 #41114
Another update. This includes the late period dress of the Leib-garde inf. Only the Equipage, Artillery, and Sappers are left to be done (for the late period). Not a whole lot to report – the L-g. Finland and L-g. Lithuania drummers might be laced differently – but I have finally decided that the red cloth of the guard should be presented as scarlet.
Oh yeah, the powers that be decided to change how CSS handles vertical text. Had to figure it all out to rescue my saddlecloth SVG’s…09/05/2016 at 00:40 #41751
All Right! Late period Leib-garde is done. Very minor stuff for the artillery, until I got to the saddle cloths. Worked at it a while and finally got a satisfactory narrative. I think I actually contributed something by looking at the materials presented by LPK and pulling out info they overlooked. Well, it might not matter even in 28mm;-)09/05/2016 at 12:04 #4176909/05/2016 at 15:06 #4178425/05/2016 at 06:15 #4244631/05/2016 at 20:48 #42716
Sorry Bandit, missed this. That would be explained by (at the moment) footnote 33:
Dniester Inspection color changed from purple on Nov. 27, 1804. The collar and cuff flap became d.green, piped red, and the cuffs solid red. The Dniester Inspection was reorganized at this time. The Siberia and Kherson Grenadiers were ordered to use the new Inspection colors with their old regimental facings, creating a duplication that was reconciled when they joined the Crimea Inspection. The Crimea Inspection reorganized by July 3, 1805, although the Garrison units had transferred by Feb. 26, 1804.20/06/2016 at 04:34 #43605
Another month, another update. This is for the early Leib-garde foot, which means I’ve covered just about everything from 1801-1814 available in LPK, along with the Pauline cavalry and line. Still there’s the generals, the L-g. Garrison, the Pauline L-g. (ugh!) and the general chapters on the overall uniform reforms although I don’t expect to get much specific out of the latter.
The L-g. got a good deal simplified, as it turns out the individual regimental lace patterns are an error by Orlov which misled Viskovatov. So I had to prune a good deal of colorful graphics…otherwise there’s confirmation that the L-g. drummers used more lace than the line, and patent leatherwork for the L-g. Jaeger.
Enjoy!25/07/2016 at 06:31 #45334
So, taking a hint from something someone posted – maybe Bryce – I decided I should chart out the pompons and swordknots . Turned out to be a lot more work than anticipated. Cleaned up a bunch of errors and misconceptions, added some things, and wrote a huge footnote explaining what we don’t know. But the main thing that I banged my head against for a few days is that the exact shape of the swordknot appears to have changed from 1791 to 1817 and I’m not sure if it’s by intent or just variation. And the NCO ruff (ring) appears to have gone from a white, black, orange mix to only a black and orange mix at some unknown time.
But it sure was fun making the SVG work! I ended up writing a little Python routine to spit out an SVG with about a thousand random pixels set to orange or black so that the graphics look a real mix of yarns, without any discernible patterns. Anyway, take a look and let me know if catch any errors.
Jonathan28/07/2016 at 13:55 #4557414/08/2016 at 01:40 #46505
Wheeeeeee! Just posted with forage cap graphics and info. Always interesting when you start really digging deep what is known and what is up in the air.
For me, a big decision to change the translation of planshevyy from ‘drab’ to ‘bisque’, but probably won’t be noticed!-)
Well, there’s still a whole section on generals…17/08/2016 at 17:57 #46761
Thanks for the continued updates Jonathan. The information on forage caps is particularly useful. I’ve got a half-painted battalion of guys in forage caps and the reason I had stopped painting them was that I didn’t know what colour to paint the caps of the musketeer companies. Well, now I do; so the battalion may finally get to go into battle.
I wonder if you can help me on another matter regarding the Russians. I think I read somewhere (but I have no idea where) that Russian standard bearers didn’t stand side-by-side like the British; instead one was in the front rank and one was in the rear (third) rank. Do you know if this is correct?18/08/2016 at 19:01 #46841
My understanding – and I trust someone will jump in and correct me if wrong – was that while the Russians maintained two standards per battalion (until nominally 1813-1814 and actually whenever old regiments actually implemented the new single standard policy) was that like the Prussians, the placement of the standard bearers varied according to a variety of things:
• battalion formation
• movement vector
If the battalion was moving forward, there was a given placement, if it was moving retrograde there was a different placement, etc…
The Bandit18/08/2016 at 19:16 #46842
All my figures are basically advancing straight ahead in a line formation so ideally I would like to put the standards in position for that manoeuvre.18/08/2016 at 22:08 #46856
Hi guys, – it’s not something I’ve paid a lot of attention to, but yes, one in the first rank (undoubtedly the white in the first battalion) and one in the third rank, at least in ordinary circumstances.18/08/2016 at 22:43 #46857
That’s great. I’ve got a bunch of Russians ready to base and I’ve been putting it off because I wasn’t sure where to put the standards.01/02/2017 at 02:57 #57015
Well, a happy day recently!
Okay, so with General Slade’s interest in the new books on Russian flags, I dusted off my manuscript for a look-see. A couple of things have changed since I put it aside. Working with Leonov, Popov, and Kibovsky has made me a lot more comfortable with what is known and what is not and I think I have a more decisive handle on the flags data. The other thing is I’ve gotten a lot better with SVG and decided that I really ought to try some simple graphics and worry about the details later. General Slade’s enthusiasm for pretty pictures reminded me that that’s what it’s all about. Excruciately listing all the possible variations of color in the sources only excites me…
So I whipped up some SVG and some modal CSS and some JQuery and, well it fell together fairly easily (for that kind of thing which is always a headache to some extent). But here’s where the excitement comes! Okay hopefully Katie or John Salt will stumble on this and empathise. A lot has happened with SVG and HTML since I got started. SVG tags are now recognized in HTML 5 so a lot of really ugly XML namespace boilerplate doesn’t need to be there. But even better, I realized you could give SVG object classes – AND CSS classes will take SVG attributes like fill or transform. This is a huge win because it means you can parameterize with a class. Instead of having to write fill=”#00FFFF” everywhere I wanted to color azure, I can make azure a class name with fill:#00FFFF; and everything I want colored azure I just add class=’azure’. Then if I decide it really should be #00FFEF, I need only change one line. The same with transforms. This is how you move big blocks of graphics around in the view. You can define, say, a flag in an 800 by 800 format, then scale it appropriately for a browser window. So you want your scale decision separate from your flag definition and you can do this by putting it into a class.
Anyway, I defined all the 1797 patterns for the line, and I can cruise up and down the list, clicking up patterns!-) My the Russians used a lot of violet…01/02/2017 at 09:06 #57027
It’s nice to know that my enthusiasm for pretty pictures has proved to be a motivating factor. I hope progress on your manuscript continues at a pace. It would be great to see it published one day.
Incidentally, I looked at your facings page today for the first time in a while and I had forgotten quite how much information it includes. It really is an excellent resource and I would like to thank you again for putting all the work in and then making your research available to everyone.01/02/2017 at 15:32 #57062GreystreakParticipant
General Slade may wish to revisit an old posting by ‘Seroga’ on The Miniatures Page, regarding “Russian Colour Parties”: http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=265911 .
Bryce Allen01/02/2017 at 16:25 #57072
That is a really useful link. Let’s hope Seroga finds his way to TWW one day. He certainly seems to know his stuff.
Edit: Unless I am being really dense and Jonathan and Seroga are one and the same person?01/02/2017 at 18:35 #57079
No, but sooner or later you will ask me about someone else…
Part of the reason I decided to post under my real name was to avoid too much snark and to think twice if I really wanted to say what I wrote…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.