Welcome to the Strelets Forum.
Please feel free to discuss any aspect of 1/72 scale plastic figures, not simply Strelets.
If you have any questions about our products then we will answer them here.
Sorry but I totally agree with Thomas Krug: the first image shows a white uniform with trousers but the jacket has two rows of buttons while the Austrian uniform has only one. The police cap is also not sufficient to identify the nationality of the soldier. The second image concerns a landwher unit and it is known that these soldiers were dressed in uniforms very different from those of the regular army. It can therefore be considered that these two examples are not representative of the Austrian regular army.
An interesting discussion.
I'd like to support what 'Opinion' has provided (I'd refer to you by name, but perhaps you prefer the anonymity of the pseudonym?) with some published material.
I don't have any direct translations of primary documents so am relying on recent compilations in English.
Rawkins, in his 'The Austro-Hungarian Army 192–1814' states, under the heading of 'Regulation 1769-1798' (for both Hungarian and German regiments):
"The breeches and/or pantaloons remained basically the same as before except that the high over-the-knee gaiters began to be replaced with shorter knee length black gaiters with either brass or cloth covered buttons for campaign wear by the ‘German’ regiments. The high gaiters were initially retained for parade by some regiments but by the time the army took the field in 1805 all regiments had adopted the more practical and comfortable shorter versions. Although many regiments had been issued with overall trousers for campaign wear, during the campaigns of 1792-1799, usually wool for winter and cotton or linen for summer these only really made an appearance during the 1805 campaign. The garments were manufactured locally for the individual regiments and varied greatly in colour and quality from dark grey to white and some regiments even using cheap beige or light brown cloth."
Street, in 'The Army of the Empire of Austria-Hungary 1798–1814' has a lot of extremely similar, sometimes exactly the same words as Rawkins. Dunno who influenced whom. Perhaps they both utilised the same source...?
Of course, regulations are not practice. The latter being influenced by preference, practicalities, wear and tear and the 'liberation' of garments and materials along the way.
Let's face it, there is no clear indication regarding uniform items. Even the patch on the grenadier's hat. Most commonly it is represented in the facing colour, which looks most impressive in painted figures.
For what it is worth, I'll be most happy to have these figures represented in trousers. I really like the mix of covered and uncovered grenadier headgear too. The waving officer is a beaut pose, I reckon.
Thank you James. Some people just don't understand that regulation is not the same as reality and that the latter may markedly depart from the former, especially in wartime, and for a number of reasons. As you say, individual commanders' preferences may also matter. Contemporary sources often help to make this clear. Of course, not all contemporary material is of the same quality but if originating with an actual regimental commander I'd say it's highly reliable. Nevertheless, many people prefer to unshakeably believe in what has been established by uniformology gurus (many of whom just rehash convictions and opinions of their cherished colleagues), apparently "once and for all", and that what diverges from the norm must be wrong. It's their choice. :upside_down_face:
Your point was:
"...as far as I know trousers have never been issued to German regiments."
Well, clearly, whether for drill only or not, they were issued (at least for the Nr. 3 Erzherzog Carl Regiment). The evidence is there. Of course, you are free to ignore it.
Have a nice day.