Napoleon's Regiments: Battle Histories of the Regiments of the French Army, 1792-1815

Rating:
Summary: Vistula Lancers omissions inexcusable
Review: An interesting reading all in all but I am still perplexed for the reasons of the Vistula Lancers being so marginalised? Agree with comments and errors pointed out by A reader from United States. The Vistula Lancers provided one of the finest cavalry regiment in the French service and deserve some decent consideration, at least no major errors and omissions. The more that all records on the regimet are easily available in France and in the French language, so no need to dig in the Polish archives. To the best of my knowledge, the Vistula Lancers charge at Albuhera was absolutely unique in the course of the Peninsular War and a statement to the effect - 1811: no actions of note is just inexcusable. Neither a word about another unprecedented conduct in the course of the war - the British refused to provide wounded lancers with medical treatment after the battle in a petty act of revenge. The Poles and the British have a major disagreement on the course of the charge with the British describing the Poles as perfect barbarians - only after loosing one must remember. Whatever controversial the charge was, a respectable scholar should rather not omit such an action. One should also keep in mind that Otto von Pivka is also an author of MAA title Napoleon's Polish Troops. So my expectations as for the book, at least the Polish account, was much higher. For Vistula Lancers treatment - two stars only.

Rating:
Summary: Vistula Lancers omissions inexcusable
Review: An interesting reading all in all but I am still perplexed for the reasons of the Vistula Lancers being so marginalised? Agree with comments and errors pointed out by A reader from United States. The Vistula Lancers provided one of the finest cavalry regiment in the French service and deserve some decent consideration, at least no major errors and omissions. The more that all records on the regimet are easily available in France and in the French language, so no need to dig in the Polish archives. To the best of my knowledge, the Vistula Lancers charge at Albuhera was absolutely unique in the course of the Peninsular War and a statement to the effect - 1811: no actions of note is just inexcusable. Neither a word about another unprecedented conduct in the course of the war - the British refused to provide wounded lancers with medical treatment after the battle in a petty act of revenge. The Poles and the British have a major disagreement on the course of the charge with the British describing the Poles as perfect barbarians - only after loosing one must remember. Whatever controversial the charge was, a respectable scholar should rather not omit such an action. One should also keep in mind that Otto von Pivka is also an author of MAA title Napoleon's Polish Troops. So my expectations as for the book, at least the Polish account, was much higher. For Vistula Lancers treatment - two stars only.

Rating:
Summary: Grande Armee
Review: Digby Smith, a respected Napoleonic historian, details the regiments of the Imperial Guard, the line infantry, the light infantry, the artillery, the line cavalry, the light cavalry, auxiliary troops, and foreign and colonial regiments. He covers the full array of units from the legendary Grenadiers of the Old Guard to the indispensable engineers, train and gendarmes. Also included are French naval units and French naval losses and actions,which for me is one of the best part of the great Book. With a superb Introduction, charting the development of the French Army in the Revolutionary period, and detailed appendices, this is the best single-volume study of Napoleon's army at war and a vital reference work on the troops that conquered Europe with alot of biographies of some regimental officers.

Rating:
Summary: missing data, omitions, errors
Review: In Napoleon's Regiments, Digby Smith, a well-noted Napoleonic scholar, has compiled a detailed list of the units that formed the French army between 1792-1815. The Imperial Guard, Line Infantry, Light Infantry, Cavalry, Artillery and other units are covered, usually at the regimental level. Typical entries list a unit in numerical order by regiment, listing it's pre-Revolutionary ancestors, it's title in 1792, colonels and personalities, campaigns and officer casualties. There is a huge amount of data in this thin volume and t should be in every Napoleonic library.

This is a superb volume. However while using it to conduct research on the French siege of Toulon in 1793, I noted that Smith had included information of questionable veracity. On page 49, under the listing for the 1st Battalion/28th Infantry, he lists a Sergeant Eberle who killed an Austrian major and for his act, was given a field promotion by General Dugommier. Unfortunately, there were no Austrian troops sent to Toulon due to political complications with Piedmont. While the 1/28th and Dugommier were at Toulon, there were no Austrians or Croats as Smith's entry claims. Later, on page 138, he claims that the "Royal Louis" battalion formed in Toulon was composed of men from the disbanded 2/28th Battalion. This is very unlikely. Admiral Hood's journal clearly shows that the French troops that remained in Toulon were mostly disarmed and used as civil police. The Royal Louis battalion probably inducted a few of these men, but most of its 385 troops came from disgruntled dockyard workers and petit bourgeoisie worried about Jacobin revenge. In both cases, Smith's entries display questionable information.

Despite some errors, which is to be expected in a work of this depth, this is a wonderful supplement for napoleonic research. Hopefully, reader comments will clean up errors for future editions.

Rating:
Summary: Pure Gold For the Napoleonic Researcher
Review: In Napoleon's Regiments, Digby Smith, a well-noted Napoleonic scholar, has compiled a detailed list of the units that formed the French army between 1792-1815. The Imperial Guard, Line Infantry, Light Infantry, Cavalry, Artillery and other units are covered, usually at the regimental level. Typical entries list a unit in numerical order by regiment, listing it's pre-Revolutionary ancestors, it's title in 1792, colonels and personalities, campaigns and officer casualties. There is a huge amount of data in this thin volume and t should be in every Napoleonic library.

This is a superb volume. However while using it to conduct research on the French siege of Toulon in 1793, I noted that Smith had included information of questionable veracity. On page 49, under the listing for the 1st Battalion/28th Infantry, he lists a Sergeant Eberle who killed an Austrian major and for his act, was given a field promotion by General Dugommier. Unfortunately, there were no Austrian troops sent to Toulon due to political complications with Piedmont. While the 1/28th and Dugommier were at Toulon, there were no Austrians or Croats as Smith's entry claims. Later, on page 138, he claims that the "Royal Louis" battalion formed in Toulon was composed of men from the disbanded 2/28th Battalion. This is very unlikely. Admiral Hood's journal clearly shows that the French troops that remained in Toulon were mostly disarmed and used as civil police. The Royal Louis battalion probably inducted a few of these men, but most of its 385 troops came from disgruntled dockyard workers and petit bourgeoisie worried about Jacobin revenge. In both cases, Smith's entries display questionable information.

Despite some errors, which is to be expected in a work of this depth, this is a wonderful supplement for napoleonic research. Hopefully, reader comments will clean up errors for future editions.

Rating:
Summary: Vive l'Empereur!
Review: Once again Napoleonic historian Digby Smith has presented us with a data filled compendium that is one of the best Napoleonic references on the market today.

A fact-filled gold mine of information, this volume gives the history of every French line and light infantry regiment, all of the cavalry regiments, as well as the regiments of the Imperial Guard. There is so much information that at times it is overwhelming and you have to put the book down for a breather.

I anxiously awaited the publication of this volume when I heard it was in the publication mill. I wanted it for the information, but also because Digby Smith is a reliable author and it was being published by Greenhill, which has a superb reputation for publishing reliable and accurate Napoleonic books

This book needs to be on every Napoleonic enthusiasts bookshelf and it is an easy reference to use, as the units are in numerical order by category. There were only two things that I found not there-the Tirailleurs Corses, (Corsican Sharpshooters) and the 15th Cuirassiers. The Corsicans were a highly distinguished battalion of light infantry that were in Soult's IV Corps for the campaigns of 1805-1807, and were attached to Davout's III Corps for at least part of the 1809 campaign. In 1811 they became part of the newly reactivated 11th Legere (light) infantry regiment, along with the Swiss Valaison Battalion and the Tirailleurs do Po. An immensely distinguished battalion, it would have been helpful if they were included. The 15th Cuirassiers were an unauthorized regiment organized by Davout from a cadre of the 1st Cuirassiers in Hamburg in 1813 which eventually became a combat worthy outfit. Understandably, there were not on the regular French order of battle, but there inclusion would have been most interesting.

All in all, this is an immense achievement, and it goes will with two other volumes: John Elting's Swords Around a Throne, and Eduard Detaille's L'Armee Francaise. Highly recommended.

Rating:
Summary: missing data, omitions, errors
Review: This known British author wrote several books about the Napoleonic period. I especially enjoyed his "Leipzig". However after reading his newest book "Napoleon's regiments" I am dissapointed. Author makes very numerous errors and omitions.

For example, the strength of the grenadiers of the guard in one of the diagrams is doubled. I thought that the strength of the grenadiers of the old guard is known to every child.

Another issue. Digby Smith writes: "7e Regiment de Chevau-Legers Raised from the 1er Lanciers de la Legion du Vistule on 18 June 1811.Napoleonic Campaigns and Officer Casualties: 1811: no actions of note."

This is completely wrong. In 1811 the lancers destroyed British Colborne's brigade at Albuhera! THis is the only case when the British infantry suffered so much in the hands of Napoleonic cavalry and this is ommited. Even more. Author mention many other French regiments whenever they captured even a single battle trophy, eagle or regimental color. But the Vistula Uhlans captured 5-6 Colors and there is not a beep about it. (Read these following pages and chck it out yourrself: 1er Regiment de Lanciers pages - 224-225 7e Regiment de Chevau-Legers pages - 260-261)

Writing about Napoleon's regiments and not mentioning Albuhera this is like writing about British or Prussian cavalry regs and not mentioning in their battle record Waterloo at all !

Another thing. Author writes about the Vistula lancers: "1807: in Prussia and at Danzig; no action of note; 15 May - ChEs Swiderski - wounded"

This is completely wrong. Just in this year, 1807, on May 15th the uhlans demolished Prussian forces at the Battle of Strigau (Silesia) despite being grossly outnumbered. In this battle participated also famous French general Lefebvre-Desnouettes. Why Digby Smith writes that there was no action at all is for me a mistery.

Author doesn't mention other important facts about this regiment, despite having in his bibliography books with description of these events in Peninsula and in Central Europe. (One of many more examples is the important capture of Paso des Despeñaperros by the lancers and thus oppening the road to Andalusia for the French army.)

No word about the fact that the Vistula lancers lost their Color to the Spaniards.

There are other errors and omitions.

There is no word how the voltigeurs were formed in Line infantry despite the fact that the line were the "mainstream". Instead author covers only the volt. in light regs. Pity, there were some differences between them and it should be explained.

And more. I wish that the Colonels during Imperial period - infantry are covered in the same way as are the colonels in Revolutionary period. If author gives the names of colonels in cavalry so why not in infantry ? There are big gaps with the infantry.

More. Writing about Mr Radziwill author writes that he was wounded at: "Hanau 30 Oct 1815". 1815 ? Hanau was fought 2 years earlier. And this is only one out of many errrors with the dates.

There are other errors already mentioned in earlier reviews, so no need to repeat them and make the list even longer.

So, after reading "Leipzig" written by this author I expected much more. If I have to recommend one of his books I take "Leipzig" instead of "Napoleon's regiments." I give it 2 1/2 stars.