"Austerlitz - 2nd Dec: comments on Myth, Truth & Playability" Topic

I'm currently building up a resource of information on Austerlitz, the myth and the truth, and would be interested in comments on the following description. The fact that others may disagree in this interpretation is fine, in fact divergent views are welcome – I am not an expert on this battle and welcome any views or corrections. Even from Shane or Kiley!

The full text and dramatic re-enactment photos can be seen here
link
or at the direct link here:
link

Any help most welcome.
_________________________________________________________
With the anniversary of this seminal battle – the Battle of the Three Emperors – coming up, I thought it would be a neat idea to have a thread we could use as a resourse, with anything anyone might have on it that could be useful to gamers or questions.

So the first thing is, anyone actually played this as a game?
____________________________________________________________
Dispositions
170,000 men were poised to take part in this battle: almost unpresidented numbers. Napoleon had given the Allies to think that his army was in a weak state and that he wanted peace. Post-battle reports claim he was hoping that they would attack, and to encourage them he weakened his right flank. However, Napoleon left many plans and all we can know for sure is that he was prepared to fight. He had Soult's IV Corps ready to advance in the centre, Davout's III Corps marching to the southern flank, the Imperial Guard and Bernadotte's I Corps were held in reserve while the V Corps under Lannes guarded the north.

Weyrother's Allied plan involved a massive early morning attack with four huge columns, designed to cross the Sokolnitz stream and envelope the French right. Kutozov, the Russian commander and nominal Allied CinC was against the plan, but was overruled by the Czar.

Battle.
The battle began around 8 AM with the first allied column attacking the village of Telnitz, defended by the 3rd Line Regiment. Davout's corps arrived at this time and threw the Allies out of Telnitz before they too were attacked by hussars and re-abandoned the town. Additional Allied attacks out of Telnitz were checked by French artillery.

Allied columns attacked the French right over the Sokolnitz, but were repulsed.

It was Soult who assaulted (the rather low, though French reports state otherwise) Pratzen Heights, in fog (history has it under Napoleon's order, but the evidence is slight). Allied commanders fed some of the fourth column into the struggle – in fact it was due to Kutizov's prescience that his column had taken a more northerly course, nearer to the centre. St. Hilaire, however prevailed. To the north, General Vandamme's division attacked the Staré Vinohrady (vinyards).

The Russian Imperial Guard counter-attacked Vandamme, taking a French standard. The French Guard cavalry went forward, but were inneffective. It wasn't until Drouet joined the battle that the French strted to push the Russians back.

In the north, Prince Liechtenstein's heavy cavalry began to assault Kellerman's cavalry and prevailed. But Caffarelli's men halted the Russian assaults and permitted Murat to send two cuirassier divisions into the fray to finish off the Russian cavalry. Lannes then led his V Corps against Bagration's men and after hard fighting managed to drive the Russians off.

In the south, there was still heavy fighting over Sokolnitz and Telnitz. In a double assault, St. Hilaire's div. and part of Davout's III Corps routed the Allies at Sokolnitz and the commanders of the first two columns, Generals Kienmayer and Langeron, retreated.

The Allies lost 27,000 men, the French at least 9,000
________________________________________________________

"So the first thing is, anyone actually played this as a game?"

yep….

link

I was the 'worried Austrian"

Earlier this year I blogged some thoughts and impressions of this game over several entries:

link

They are at the bottom of the page, the later postings deal with the Jena refight.

K

Yes, we did also, on December 3, 2005 one day off the 200th anniversary. We used 15mm figures and fought the French attack against the Russians and Austrians on the Pratzen Heights.

link

I used Robert Goetz's 1805: Austerlitz as the source for my order of battle, troop dispositions, and terrain.

Jim

I'd second Mr Goetz's book.
Probably the best English language source on the battle.
donald

Not the whole thing, though I was at the 200th anniversary reenactment. ;-) I think the most interesting and balanced part of the battle was the French left flank where Lannes squared off against Bagration. Lots of cavalry, Guards, ebb and flo, etc. It would make a manageable part of the battle to replay in a reasonable amount of time giving both sides a good shot at victory.

At least, that's my opinion.

Michael

I walked the battlefield in 2002 and believe me the Pratzen is high. From the French side it looks like a good sized hill but when you get to the top and look down it is like a mountain. The view is excellent and there must have been a thick mist to hide Soult's Corps. I would not like to attempt riding a horse down the hill and would be hesitant to bring artillery down either. It would be essential to descend at an angle. This hill would be difficult to recreate on any wargames table.

The western approaches of the heights are fairly gradual but the grade on the southwest is steeper and to the east steeper still. It would be fine defensive terrain for an attack from the east, which is why the allies interpreted the French withdrawl from the heights as a definite sign of weakness. Broglie's comments emphasize the difficulties the Russians had in retreating from the heights – the retreat of the guard at Krenowitz down a very steep grade was pretty chaotic.

Donald and Jim – thanks for the plug!

Cacadore: The brief synopsis you mention is a fair enough broad summary, but deserves a few edits –

1. Probably closer to 150,000 total men engaged

2. The main body of Davout's corps arrived at Sokolnitz, not Telnitz. He detached 108e ligne (plus the voltigueur companies of the 15e leg) to Telnitz while en route.

3. The "Sokolnitz Stream" should be the Goldbach. "Over the Sokolnitz" should read "over the Goldbach at Telnitz and Sokolnitz".

4. Kutuzov's "prescience"? Must be a Kutuzov fan writing. The northerly route of 4th column was the result of 4th column marching from Krenowitz to Kobelnitz in pretty much a straight line. There were 5 bridges on the lower Goldbach – 2 at Telnitz (Kienmayer + 1st Column to cross), 1 at Sokolnitz (2nd column to cross), 1 at Sokolnitz Castle (3rd column to cross) and one just north of Kobelnitz (4th column to cross). Kutuzov was mainly dragging his feet because he disagreed with the plan and was reluctant to leave a huge gap in the center of the allied army. I might agree with crediting Kutuzov with good common sense, but not prescience. It required a direct order by the Tsar to get him moving with the result that 4th column got a late start and ended up in the right place at a key moment. Had they been where they were supposed to have been, the French may have doubled the final allied losses and taken a few hours less in doing it.

5. Russian guard counter-attacking Vandamme … sort of. More a matter of brushing aside a brigade that was in the way of the retreat.

Thanks for the comments
Broglie 23 Nov 2007 5:33 a.m. PST
''I walked the battlefield in 2002 and believe me the Pratzen is high. From the French side it looks like a good sized hill but when you get to the top and look down it is like a mountain.''

Didn't get that impression at all. From the west, that is the French approach, it's less than a gentle slope – if that.

I'll try and find a better map – maybe we're looking at different sites?

From the west it is a gentle slope, but rises to what I would consider a "good-sized hill", particularly south of Pratze.

For good interactive online maps, try 212.158.143.149/index_en.php

Select "Regional Plans of Forest Development"

Turn on "basic Layers of the Czech Republic" and "Hypsography"

Zoom in on the arm of region 35 that is between region 30 and region 36 (Brno area). Keep zooming to at least 1:28094. Observe the elevations and steepness of the grade by Krenovice (Krenowitz), Zbysov (Zbischov), Hosteradky-Resov (Klein-Hostieradek) and Ujezd-u-Brno (Augezd) and compare to same between Prace (Pratze) and Kobylnice (Kobelnitz) and Ponetovice (Puntowitz). At 1:14047 you get the actual elevations. The rise from Krenowitz is about 75m to the plateau, I make it to be something in the neighborhood of an 8% grade. Nowhere near that from the west.

Then you can have fun with the Orthophoto. The peace monument is plainly visible by the Pratzeberg on the 320m elevation line, you can see good detail at 1:1756. The entrance faces approx. in the direction of St. Hilaire's original advance on the heights. The old pheasantry and Sokolnitz castle are pretty much the way they were, but the towns of course have all grown quite a bit. You can also pick out the Pratze church (rebuilt on the original site).

Enjoy!

Khevenhuller 22 Nov 2007 11:05 a.m. PST
'"So the first thing is, anyone actually played this as a game?"yep….link'
Nice pictures – they look pretty comphensive. So there was snow on the ground?!

Carnot93 29 Nov 2007 2:36 p.m. PST
''From the west it is a gentle slope, but rises to what I would consider a "good-sized hill", particularly south of Pratze.''

Well, we're not that far apart then. The impression you get in the histories is that the French has to climb something substantial – but I found the French approach to be up a relatively gentle slope when I walked it. Once up it, if you look to the left, there's a more precipitous slope – but still only a few yards deep, from which you get a good view of the north. And at the Eastern end there is also a more substantail slope – but nothing that gives much of an advantage. I would judge, that the significance of the 'heights', liea more in their function as a landmark, they obscure the land behind them and obsticals like hedges are going to cut into line of sights….

Talking about hedges and lines of sight, can anyone be specific about how field boundaries were marked at that time in Central Europe ? Would Moravia be different from the Rhine Valley which in turn is different from Saxony and so on ? For example were ditches more common than walls or hedges or the other way around etc. I keep reading about field systems i.e. the Corn fields at Friedland, but it is difficult to put it into context, I have a mental picture of a traditional British landscape when I think of fields etc, but I strongly suspect this is way off the mark ?

Quote
I'll try and find a better map – maybe we're looking at different sites?

Response

I'm pretty sure I was at the correct site. I spent three days there. I'm not that daft.

Regards

Broglie 03 Dec 2007 5:10 a.m. PST
''I'm pretty sure I was at the correct site. I spent three days there. I'm not that daft.''
Well, the name ''Austerlitz'' doesn't appear on modern maps. It could have thrown you!

No, seriously, I think you'll find it's the steepness we were disputing. It has different steepnesses on different sides……the question is, if there's an obstical to speak of on the French line of approach.

If you look at the entry I posted today (Mon Dec 03, 2007 6:08 pm) on the second page of this picture link, you'll see what I mean:
link

Shortcut
''Talking about hedges and lines of sight, can anyone be specific about how field boundaries were marked at that time in Central Europe ? Would Moravia be different from the Rhine Valley which in turn is different from Saxony and so on ?''If I remember right, there are maps in the Slavkov museum there. If I remember right, apart from showing there were no 'lakes', they also show that the Pratzen itself was vinyard land (hense the name: Stary vinohrady) with market gardens – as opposed to livestock. There are some hedges at the borders of fields, but since they weren't there for livestock enclosure, as far as I know, I'd doubt they would be up to much – defense-wise.

On the other hand, as has been mentioned, there is a bit of a bank on the north eastern side, and short banks may well have been left uncultivated.

Carnot93
''1. Probably closer to 150,000 total men engaged''
OK. But in other battles one has always to down-play the numbers on the rolls, to take account of illness, commissary-cheating and desertion.

''2. The main body of Davout's corps arrived at Sokolnitz, not Telnitz. He detached 108e ligne (plus the voltigueur companies of the 15e leg) to Telnitz while en route.''
Yes, my summary went for the excigent details!

''3. The "Sokolnitz Stream" should be the Goldbach.''
Sorry, I was writing too fast for sense to intrude. The stream is the Goldbach.

''4. Kutuzov's "prescience"? …….''
Prescience, by definition comes sub-consciously. I mention it only to draw attention, I guess, to the whole issue of Kutuzov's lack of enthusism for the plan itself. There was confusion in the mustering of the men, and they did set off late, but the attidude of Kutozov, and whether he was just 'lazy' or in fact was taking precautions as Tolstoy suggests is an unresolvable choice. Kutozov was against the Allied plan and was overruled by the Czar. The plan, was rather all or nothing. Put this together, in respect of a man positioning his troops for what he may beleive is a disaster about to happen………..and Francophiles and Russio-philes tend each to have their own spin on Kutozov's genius (or otherwise).

''5. Russian guard counter-attacking Vandamme … sort of. More a matter of brushing aside a brigade that was in the way of the retreat''.
Slightly hard, nonetheless. The French brigade was beaten, they did have to fight!

21eRegt 22 Nov 2007 7:43 p.m. PST
''Not the whole thing, though I was at the 200th anniversary reenactment.;-) I think the most interesting and balanced part of the battle was the French left flank where Lannes squared off against Bagration. ''
Well, I might have seen you! But the truth is there were a lot of other people there too: they turned half the motorway into a car-park. My then girlfriend was not a happy bunny: it was a little like Sibera, but colder – and having to park 5 miles away, and it taking 4 hours to get out didn't help!

Cacadores -

There are some good photos at the link below (in slideshow format), one of the southern end of the Pratzen from the Zuran hill and the other looking north at the heights from the south. The heights are essentially a plateau, more or less level. At the northern end they are roughly even with the surrounding ground. The ground trends downward on both sides, though, along the paths of the Rausnitz and Goldbach, so that at the southern end it is quite prominent. In the photo of the heights from the south by Robert Ouvrard in the link you can get a good feel of the slope that St. Hilaire's men climbed in their assault on Pratze and the Pratzeberg (viewed behind the tower). In the north where Lannes and Murat were operating there was really no significant slope, just some folds and undulations. So it will depend on which angle you approach. The view from the Zuran shows it very well.

link

For the questions:

1. Highest plausible figures would be about 82k for the allies and 73k for the French. To reach 170k you would need about 90,000 allies which exceeds any reasonable calculations.

2. Just a matter of emphasis, as it is written it seems the main body was at Telnitz and the detachment at Sokolnitz rather than the other way around. Saying Davout's corps arrived at Telnitz when in fact it was a single regiment plus two companies of voltigeurs is certainly misleading.

3. Everything anyone writes will benefit from an extra pair of eyes to look over it!

4. I vote for cautious. He certainly disagreed based on sound military judgement and experience as you note. Here my disagreement is with the word, which has a different connotation to me, not so much the concept.

5. No dispute that they were defeated, 4e ligne routed and 24e leg caught in the wrong formation and routed as well. The issue is whether this constituted a counterattack on the heights or rough handling of two regiments in the way of the retreat.

I do hope you warmed your girlfriend up nicely after you got back!

Carnot 93

Would any French artillery supporting Vandamme's attack sited on the French side of the "slope" have line of sight to any Allied formations on the Allied side of the slope ?

Or to put it another way, if it is a plateau, how wide (ok, I appreciate that it is difficult to be precise, but in gaming terms ;-) ) is the flat bit immediately to the south of Stare-Vinhrady ?

Shortcut –

The central part of the plateau immediately to the south of the Stare Vinhrady (between the SV and Pratze) would in very rough terms be a 2kmx2km square oriented with one side facing northeast (in the direction of Vandamme's advance. Here I am considering the 270-280m elevation. The 4th column was advancing from Krenowitz through Pratze en route to Kobelnitz, the road following approximately the same route as the road today and running diagonally through my imaginary square. Miloradovich deployed his Russians to meet Vandamme somewhere to the right of the road and so on the slope, not on the crest, so French artillery would have had full LOS of the Russian positions. The Austrian line that formed behind the Russians was on a line from the Stare Vinohrady (basically a hillock on the largely level plateau) towards the town of Pratze – in other words they formed on the western (or northwestern) edge of the heights. As far as I can tell, French artillery would have had clear LOS of this position too, but it's impossible to determine the precise positioning of the line beyond being anchored on the Stare Vinohrady at one end. LOS would certainly be blocked between mid-slope and the central part of the heights.

For St. Hilaire's division (Thiebault and Morand), once they moved into position south and southeast of Pratze, their artillery would have had clear LOS of Jurczik's advance.

As far as height, the rise from Girzikowitz is about 30m to the main part of the heights (2.5 km advance) but most of the rist is in the last 1200m so about a 2.5% grade (fairly gentle as Cacadores noted). For St. Hilaire's division, Thiebault's brigade had to ascend some 60m from Puntowitz, Morand's brigade about 90m, and Varé's brigade only about 30m – also about a 2.5 km advance with the climb mainly occurring in the last 1200 meters or so – about a 5% grade.

Any idea how to determine LOS based on grade of slope vs. distance? It seems like there should be a clear correlation.

You should read the Austerltz book written by Scotty Bowden, can't think of the exact title. He goes into UNIT actions & is clearly the best book on the subject.

Carnot93, thank you very much for that, it is certainly different from the mental picture I had after looking at the "Terrain" view on Google Maps, and it has given me some things to think over. I'll get the maps out tomorrow and have a good look at it, so thanks again.

I agree with CapoRegime that Scott Bowdens book is a great. It reads well and is packed with information. I don't care what the purists say about his grasp of the German language. It is such a pity that he did not continue with the series into 1806 and 1807.

The best book at the moment easily available is

Robert Goetz : 1805 : Austerlitz

excellent battle orders, maps and balanced view of the battle

for the more enterprising :

Alombert & Colin, La Campagne de 1805 en Allemagne, tome V, editions Teissèdre, Paris 2002, shows how all the tactical planing of Napoleon and Soult was changed by the généraux de brigades

I've wargamed the battle twice at the Wargame Holiday Centre near Scarborough using In The Grand Manner rules. I played the French both times, lost badly the first time as I watched Lannes corps rout off the table. The second time was was commanding Davout's forces around Telnitz and holding on for dear life while the rest of the French team was crushing the allies. Both games were a lot of fun.

I agree that the steepness is rather depends on where you are attempting to climb the Pratzen. I was catching my breath scaling the heights from the SW side and also around the museum near the center. The French approach from the west appears more gradual, although I did not attempt to walk up the hill from this angle.

@von Winterfeldt

"The best book at the moment easily available is
Robert Goetz : 1805 : Austerlitz"

I am reading this book now, after he was mentioned before here by a colleague. It is excellente in every way. I would say to any colleague to read him, without a hesitation.

- un ami

Cross Reference to update:

TMP link

- – -
davew