Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Kroothawk wrote:@Kilkrazy:
My post was not a question, but an answer to the quoted post.
Some more details:
Zouaves originated from the Algerian district Zuaua and were already mercenaries in the Osman Empire (that's why I mistook them for Turks in my above post). France created the Corps des Zouaves in 1830. Those Zouave regiments became famous in the Crimean War (1853-1856), inspiring other nations to copy the uniforms:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zouave

I still can't follow you on the remark, that the French army was considered the best until 1870, as in that century, the army has been beaten by Russian, British and Prussian troops in the Napoleonic Wars, by US-troops in North America and was only successful against some African tribes. It degenerated under the weak regime of Napoleon III and was finally humiliated 1870 by the Prussians.

The Napoleonic Wars were only won at great cost by grinding France down over many years. They had many great victories until 1812. No-one doubted the quality of French armies until near the end. The French did all right in the Crimea, too. Thus their military reputation was still high until 1870.

Secretly of course the French Army of the mid 19th century was weaker than it appeared. As you say, its victories were often against irregular tribal forces. The weakness was made very plain by the disasters of 1870.

Despite all of this, the French reputation -- falsely -- was held in high regard by other nations. Various nations including the USA took examples in military organisation and drill from French sources. For instance, the West Point official drill book from 1835 to 55 was taken from the 1831 French regulations.

That is the opinion given by a number of military historians.

So what I am saying is that the reputation of French military power was good until after the ACW had begun, and this explains why the Zouave units were formed in the American armies.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:Lasguns would probably look way out of scale on them, the Perry do realistic limbs and realisticly scaled guns. Lasgun tips might work on the end of the rifles or just call them autoguns and go from there.

That'd still leave you without vehicles, special weapons or heavy weapons. To say nothing of different troop types. It's just not worth it.

Kilkrazy wrote:That is the opinion given by a number of military historians.

Maybe the historical French army has been underestimated in Germany after 1813/1815, 1870/1871 and 1939.

I think very true, yes.

I have some of these. They are a bit small compared to the more "heroic" white metal miniatures. The problem the Perry Miniatuers have is they are so obviously designed for figure painters because you get a box full of individuals rather than a cohevisve unit so you end up with a unit looking like the proverbial sack of manure with string round the middle. The artillery..........best left alone. The French Napoleonic stuff is wrong.

Going back to Zouaves....well I've never read so much tosh about them or the Second Empire!

The Zouaves were raised in 1830 by Marehcal Bourmont as an intermediary force between the French and the North Africans. The first Battalion was raised from 500 volunteers from the Zouaoua tribe who threw in their lot with the French against the Turks in North Africa. THe Zouaoua were well known was good soldiers and merceneries. This was interrupted by the July Revolution of 1830 which deposed Charles X in favour of Louis Philippe. The Zouaves were re-organised by Marechal Clauzel and Joseph Yusuf (future General of Division). Following the Revolution France was flooded with Europeans and Americans who wanted to "so their bit". Because of the Law of 1830 which forbade none-French men from serving in the Army these men were soon gathered up and sent to join the Zouaves, forming a second battalion in January 1831. The Foreign Legion was formed in March 1831 and all the non-Frenchmen were syphoned off into the Foreign Legion, leaving the Zouaves as being mostly Frenchmen - "bourgeouis Children of Paris" to quote the history of theZouaves by the Duc d'Aumale.

The Zouaves led a rather hotch-potch existance until September 1841 when Marechal Soult, Minister of War, issued a decree forming a Regiment of Zouaves, of three battalions, commanded by a Colonel. Each battalion had ten companies of which nine were recruited from Frenchmen and one recruited from "natives". This was because of the problems faced by the French authorites from the Muslims in the Zouaves. They refused to eat French rations, refused to fight (because if they died fighting under a Muslim they would get to h eaven, so they believed, but not under a Christian) and because Abd-el-Kadr had declared a Jihad on the French in North Africa and a lot of Moslems had deserted. Those Moslems who whished to serve France in her army were now to be part of a majority Molsem corps, the Tirailleurs Indigene, formed on 8th December 1841. There Zouaves were 99% Frenchmen by 1845. THe Zouaves were recruited from volunteers for a period of 3 to 7 years, mostly from soldiers who had finished their 7-year period of conscription and wished to remain in the army. Such was the competition for places that Sous-Officiers often took off their rank.

1852 Marechal de Saint-Arnaud, Minister of War, expanded the Zouaves to three regiments, using as a basis for each new regiment one of the existing battalions. 1854 Marechal Vaillant, Minister of War proposes the formoation of the Zouaves of the Imperial Guard. 1855 the Tirailleurs Indigene are re-orgnised, like the Zouaves into three regiements with the new title Tirailleurs Algerien.

From what I've read from contemporary newspapers and periodicals from the ACW, a lot of Americans were not in favour of raising Zouave regiments at all, espsecially in the Southern States, because they wrongly associated them and their uniforms with being Moslems. A lot of Southern ZOuave units were raised in grey as grey was not the "heathen colours" of the French Zouaves to quote one Baptsist Newspaper from Virginia. Ironically, grey was the colour of the Pontificial Zouaves.

As a PhD studying the French Second Empire Army - what it was, what it thought it was and what others thought of it ( and how close to reality that was) I'd say that the French Army of the period WAS the bset int he world It led the way in technological innovation - adopted percussion caps 1838, rifles 1840, developed the Carabine a Tige and later the MInie RIfle, had the best Military Education (any conscript who was illiterate when they joined the army was taught to read) the best MIlitary SChools (.e.g St Cyr, the Ecole Special d'Etat Major, the Artillery and Engineering Schools), was the most advanced in terms in light infatry tactics (Chasseurs a Pied formed 1840 and much copied) and also the fittest (compulsory military fitness from 1852). What let it down, like the British army, was the memories of the First Empire, the legacy of Napleoon I and Wellington having a massinve long term negative impact.

THe French Army did VERY well in ther Crimea not "did alright". They were crucial to the Victories at the Alma and at Inkerman. The French under Pelissier succeeded in assualting Sebastopol where the British failed, they won a victory at Traktir Bridge against the Russians on their own and finally did capture Sebastopol. After the fall of Sebastopol the French took the leadin pursuing the Russians out of the Crimean Peninsula. It was also the French Navy which shipped most of the supplies for the allies to the Crimea and also remember the Baltic Campaign where the French sent heavy warships, floating batteries and an Infantry Division. They also sent a fleet to the Pacific too.

The French army did quite well against the Austrians in Italy 1859 but had to stop their advance due to the sabre-rattling of Prussia.

I also wouldnt dismiss Algeria and Syria as being a negative experience as they were up against some very well trained organised and determined (fanatical?) foes. The French army only really went down hill in the 1860s by resting on it laurels AND because of budgetry cuts year on year by the French Parliament. 1867 General Trochu raised awareness of the poor quality of the French army in his famous book whicih led to a reform of the Army. The famous Chassepot was issued from 1866, new more practical uniforms were issued, the Staff Corps was reorganised, and a new drill manual proposed. The Artillery was propsed for rearmament with iron breach loading guns but there was not enough money and French Artillery had for well over a century distrusted iron guns, and such was their conservatism that they rejected the new technology.

Quality of the perry miniatures plastic is the same as GW plastics.

My Tallarns arent having vehicles. Horse-drawn or animal drawn artillery ( due to sand + engine = fail), and LOTS of cavarly. Love the idea of the Berber Horsemen sweeping down off the dunes, flowing robes, waving scimitars and firing rifles.

brettz123 wrote:Quality of the perry miniatures plastic is the same as GW plastics.

No, better than GW.

Have been kitbashing my Perry with Victrix and GW.

Have some Arbites that are just weapon swaps. You can check for scale.

I have 0 faults with Perry. Bargain value. Extremely high quality. Loads of extras. In terms of removing them from their base...good basing should remove necessity..but, if you wanted I think with very stron glue it should be ok.