"David Hamilton-Williams, fake or truth ?" Topic
372 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please do not use bad language on the forums.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Napoleonic Media Message Board Back to the Napoleonic Discussion Message Board
Areas of InterestNapoleonic
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Profile ArticleThe gates of Old Jerusalem offer a wide variety of scenario possibilities.
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
ochoin | 29 Feb 2008 5:06 a.m. PST |
Evan, I still hold out hope we may teach them all to reject their barbarous dialects & embrace the language od Shakespeare. This must be a time-warp for you. here we all are, years later, writing the same thing. donald (I was referring to various archives not available over the Net but thank you for your nudge in the right direction) |
Oliver Schmidt | 29 Feb 2008 5:18 a.m. PST |
I haven't read the sources about Marengo, so I haven't formed any opinion about the "guard infantry issue" yet. But something which strikes me is that after Marengo (on 15th Juli, the First Consul having returned to Paris on 2nd), 165 armes d'honneur were distributed: link None of them was given to the guard infanry, who supposedly had covered itself with glory. Or is there a simple explanation which I don't know ? Had they been rewarded for Marengo earlier ? Or were they for some reasons not eligible for fusils d'honneur, their higher pay being regarded as reward enough ? |
ochoin | 29 Feb 2008 5:30 a.m. PST |
Oliver, is it as simple as, despite their valiant resistance, they retreated somewhat precipitively? No-one is saying the Consular Guard were conspiculously successful merely that they somehow survived as a unit. Perhaps not the stuff you award decorations or prizes for. donald |
chasseur a cheval | 29 Feb 2008 5:35 a.m. PST |
Salut Oliver, link Awards made to the Grenadiers a Cheval de la Garde Impériale Sabres d'Honneur: Seven Fusils d'Honneur: Two Mousqetons d'Honneur: Two Carbines d'Honneur: Twenty four Awards made to the Chasseurs a Cheval de la Garde Impériale Sabres d'Honneur: Eight Fusils d'Honneur: Two Mousqetons d'Honneur: Four Carbines d'Honneur: Seventeen Trompettes d'Honneur: Two Awards made to the Grenadiers a Pied de la Garde Impériale Sabres d'Honneur: Two Fusils d'Honneur: Thirteen Baguettes d'Honneur: Three Awards made to the Chasseurs a Pied de la Garde Impériale Sabres d'Honneur: Eight Fusils d'Honneur: Twenty nine Baguettes d'Honneur: One Awards made to the Artillerie a Pied de la Garde Impériale Grenades d'Honneur: Three Awards made to the Artillerie a Cheval de la Garde Impériale Grenades d'Honneur: Seven Awards made to the Train de Artillerie and Veterans de la Garde Impériale Fusils d'Honneur: One Grenades d'Honneur: Three Comments: If you read Fastes de la Légion d'Honneur T.1 & T.2, I think there are actually a few more (not many). The distribution by units is "as of" the date of issue of the award, and occasionally differs from the formation at Marengo. Many of these, but not all, specify "for Marengo". Some specify no particular action. For the infanterie de la garde à pied, with 56 awards, the ratio of awards to troops (1+ batallions) is extremely high (compare to 15 for a whole demi-brigade in the ligne or legere). - Evan |
KF Kiley | 29 Feb 2008 5:44 a.m. PST |
Oliver, I have a list of the awards given to the Consular Guard for Marengo if you'd like to have it. I found it in one of the old La Sabretache that I have. The officers involved in the awards process were Lannes, Bessieres, and Carnot. And it should be noted that Napoleon didn't give awards to units that surrendered or that lost too many as prisoners. It should also be noted that this was the Guard's first action. They were put in an almost impossible situation, fought hard, lost heavily, retreated, regrouped, and joined in the general attack. Sincerely, Kevin |
chasseur a cheval | 29 Feb 2008 5:47 a.m. PST |
Salut encore Donald, Actually, I would have plumped for both "conspiculously successful" (the valiant resistance part), followed by "retreated somewhat precipitively" (when attacked by 2 regiments of cavalrie while in line in a firefight to their front with 2-3 battalions of infantry). Try that with some figures and about any set of rules. Ouch! Actually, I really see no problem with the "only 100 returned" as the group around the colors, the others legging it or getting killed, or wounded and captured. It is about as Petit describes it. And the whole looks "OK" to me viewed from both the "French" and "Austrian" sources. - Evan |
chasseur a cheval | 29 Feb 2008 5:53 a.m. PST |
And if I might add a little about who these guys were, adding onto Kevin's "It should also be noted that this was the Guard's first action." This formation was not much a carefully chosen elite from the line. They were mostly the garde du directoire, a few from the guards of the legislative assembly and a very small addition of new veterans from the army (and these mostly from the guides of Egypt to the chasseurs à cheval). They were old. They were Parisians. They were possibly political. They were mostly ceremonial. So many were left in PAris as unfit to make a campaign that the whole idea of "véterans de la garde" was born. - Evan |
ochoin | 29 Feb 2008 5:55 a.m. PST |
Evan, many of my wargames feature precipitate retreats & ignominous drubbings of my elite units. However this is a painful subject & I'd prefer to say no more about it
. donald |
Oliver Schmidt | 29 Feb 2008 6:09 a.m. PST |
Thanks, Evan, so there are at least 5 awards made to the grenadiers of the guards in July 1800, just after Marengo. This equals (or surpasses, if there are more) the ratio of 5 awards per battalion for the seven highest decorated demi-brigades (who received 15 weapons each, for the 3 battalions they were composed of). So it seems somehow awards to the guards were given directly and not via the minister of war – or maybe not deemed interesting enough by the editors to be included in the "Correspondance". Donald, the bulletin of 15th june calls them a "redoute de granit", which in my eyes is a kind of praise: link |
Oliver Schmidt | 29 Feb 2008 6:12 a.m. PST |
Thanks for the offer, Kevin, could you just tell how many awards were given ? Is there any reference to who issued the order or selected the meritious ? |
chasseur a cheval | 29 Feb 2008 6:45 a.m. PST |
Oliver, This is rhe list of awards stating "for Marengo" : link - Evan |
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | 29 Feb 2008 7:58 a.m. PST |
The answer to all this will take a while to compose, so I will limit myself to a few things for now. Oliver: The awards were just handed out as job lots of 5, 10 or 15 weapons to each unit and the unit commander decided who would get them. Secondly, there are two lists of awards to the Guard, one significantly larger than the other, but bizarrely including a very significant proportion of grenades d'or (the artilleryman's award). I am amused by the double standards round – Kevin invokes Evan, whose argument about the Guard being just the main batalion, is very persuasive, but which is at odds with Phillipe! Likewise, Arteis, if the same old claims keep coming round, what else can I do except repeat the answers? I was even more amused by the attemptys by those without legal training to use legal analogies, especially the one about juries, so here are the key questions that I would pose, which the jury would have to think very hard about: What is the evidence that the Guard stood in square etc? Why despite the huge Bonapartist propaganda effort did no-one from that "square" ever come forward to give his account or have it included in the propaganda? When Petit admits his account was embellished by others and he was looking west across a battlefield where smoke was blowing from the Austrian lines, did he see the events he describes some 500+m away to the north? So, will the eyewitness or participant please step forward and if he cannot be found, where is you evidence? |
Graf Bretlach | 29 Feb 2008 9:14 a.m. PST |
Wow this thread has evolved into the garde at Marengo again, I don't suppose anything new has come up since the last time Nice to see you posting again Evan, WB |
SteveJ | 29 Feb 2008 9:20 a.m. PST |
Philippe- thanks for the references. Delighted to hear of some 'neutral' examples, including an Italian one. hos459 and Shane please note. I may not have seen all the source material, and I certainly can't speak German, but sometimes you just need to apply a little common sense
Evan interestingly used the phrase "retreated somewhat precipitively", which isn't a million miles away from my own assessment-ie 'turned into a rabble and legged it'. This is not a judgement, just my view of what probably happened. The fact that French sources say the same thing, if I may allude to the courtroom yet again, wouldn't necessarily convince a jury would it? If a bunch of crooks all gave an identical account of a particular incident then you wouldn't really be convinced of its truth would you? Quite the reverse. You'd expect differences wouldn't you? In other words each would have their own subjective view of an event, with accompanying tricks of memory. In fact, much like Wellington's description of a battle. As he said when first approached about the Siborne model- 'it won't work. A battle is so much like a ball,etc.'- I'm paraphrasing here as I don't have the quote at hand but you know what I'm talking about. That the Guard, with all the myth and mystique surrounding that body, should have virtually the same write-up from French officers present, proves absolutely nothing to me. And I have no problem wuth the 'they fought valiantly' – 'were in a hopeless position'- came back to join the attack' etc. I'm sure all that happened. It was just the phrase 'withdrew in relatively good order' that caught my eye. It's clearly diplomaticspeak for 'turned into a mob and ran away'. You can cite sources to your heart's content- it's just my opinion. |
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | 29 Feb 2008 9:31 a.m. PST |
Steve J – Iraq rather proved that the multiple repetition of the same source is not the same as the use of multiple sources. Discrepancies will only show up under cross-examination, which is the response is taking a little while. However, what is the EVIDENCE – not anyone's opinion. |
von Winterfeldt | 29 Feb 2008 11:08 a.m. PST |
KFK wrote "Hans-Karl, The comment was made years before you showed up on the forums-it was in 1999, so maybe you'd better think before you comment on something you know little or nothing about. That was about the dumbest postingn I've seen in quite some time. You just cheap-shotted yourself-way to go. Sincerely, Kevin " I was on diverse for much earlier than 1999, you deserve to be stiffled, which I will do, there your contributions are a waste of time. not sincerely von Winterfeld |
chasseur a cheval | 29 Feb 2008 12:15 p.m. PST |
Dave, must we repeat ourselves so ritualistically ? "So, will the eyewitness or participant please step forward and if he cannot be found, where is you evidence?" Item 1 – Literacy in th révolutionary armies was not a highpoint. If you want memoires, you will need to look at the officers. Among the officers, I have trouble finding more than few that survived to 1815, let alone to 1822/23, when the text of Mras was published in German. The text of Stutterheim was not published until much later. The Mras text is not that "hostile" or "sexy" and to require a countermemoire from a specific single battalion for a specific campaign is absurd (I defy you to provide a memoir from the 3rd squadron of the O'Reilly CL for the 1805 campaign, for example). There was already much in print about their heroism. For example, of 12 captains of the garde à pied in July, we know explicitly that 7 made the Marengo campaign : 1 – born 1769, retired in 1811, dead in 1818 2 – born 1761, retired unfit for service after Russian campaign, dead ? 3 – born 1754, retired 1807, died 1815 4 – born 1751, killed at Bailen in 1808 5 – born 1748, prisonier after Bailen, reited in ill-health after escaping the pontoons, dies in 1834 6 – born 1755, mortally wounded at Bar-sur-Aube 1814 7 – born 1768, killed at Friedland. Two more of the 12 received the Légion d'honneur at its first award, but without explicit refernce to Marengo. One born 1753 and the other 1761. Both died ??. Two comments : I told you they were old ! Dead men do not write memoires. Which brings us to item 2 – who said they were in square or resisiting cavalry ? Here's 7 examples easily found, and chosen more to giv e the readers here an idea of the variation and breadth of these sources. Phillipe can add a few more I am sure:
Victor : "Quelques centaines dêhommes prétendent cependant lui faire obstacle: c'est le bataillon des grenadiers de la garde consulaire; il est là, en rase campagne, entre les Poggi et Villanouva, formé en carré, immobile." Berthier 20 juin 1800 : "The grenadiers of the Consular Guard were marching to support the right; they arrived and sustained three successive charges." Coignet Version 1851 – Duranton (first published) : "Ils passérent derriére les rangs et nous firent la distribution. Alors le feu redoubla. Dans ce moment, nous avions déjà beaucoup rétrogradé. Nous étions au beau milieu de la plaine. Plus de saules, plus de ravins : un buisson de place en place. Nous apercevions une grande partie de l'armée, et surtout nous voyions parfaitement la garde consulaire. Bonaparte ne tarda pas à paraÓtre. Sa présence était un gage de sécurité, un motif de confiance, une occasion d'enthousiasme inouÔ. Il fit mettre sa garde en ligne au centre de l'armée et la fit marcher en avant. Tantôt elle se formait en carré, tantôt elle se déployait en bataille : et de suite elle arrêta l'ennemi." Coignet Version 1968 – Mistler (reconstructed manuscript): "Chargés de cartouches dans leurs sarraux de toile, ils passérent derriére les rangs et nous donnérent des cartouches. Cela nous sauva la vie. Alors le feu redoubla et le Consul parut. Nous fuimes une fois plus forts. Il fit mettre sa Garde en ligne au centre de l'armée, et la fit marcher en avant. Ils arrêtérent l'ennemi de suite, formérent le carré et marchérent en bataille." Carlo Guiseppe Botta (contempory Italian nationalist and historian) "It was owing to the heroic conduct of the Consular Guard that Monnier's troops had time to arrive at Castel Ceriolo. With regard to the tenacity displayed by the Consular Guard on this occasion, the illustrious Italian historian Botta remarks: "I know not whether I ought most to laud their prowess or condemn Elsnitz's incapacity. But certain it is that the German general, although he had hemmed them in on every side, was never able to break them ; for either he did not do all that he ought to have done, or the nine hundred did more than could be deemed possible." Bio of Chef de B'on Jerôme Soulés "
. Passé comme chef de bataillon dans les grenadiers à pied de la garde consulaire le 13 nivose an VIII, Soulés suivit le premier Consul en Italie. Lors de la bataille de Marengo, o˘ il commandait 500 grenadiers ou chasseurs à pied de la garde, il reÁut léordre de se porter sur la droite de lêarmée. Il nêy lut pas plutôt arrivé, quêil eut à soutenir suecessivement cinq charges de la cavalerie ennemie , mais il les repoussa vigoureusement et lui fit essuyer de grandes pertes." Geschichte der KuK Uhlanen Regiments ERZ Ludwig "Continue the fight and gain time, until the detached division – 8.000 men under Desaix – could come (its arrival was expected befor 4 or 5 p.m.) was the only thing wich could still save the situation; to achieve this, he (my note : Bonaparte) used the life of 800 heroes. These were the Foot Consular Guard, who tookposition in front of the weakening right flank, and repelled three attacks of the Austrians. Finally, however, attacked by the austrian infantry, mit bayonnets, and, in their back, by 4 husards squadrons. " Soult : "Le premier Consul fait porter alors en avant les grenadiers de sa garde, dont le nombre ne s'élevait qu'à neuf cents. Rien n'égale l'audace et l'imperturbable sang-froid de ces braves; ils traversent la plaine, sans que rien puisse les arrêter, et ils vont se former en carré à trois cents toises de l'extrême droite du général Lannes. Semblables à un roc, contre lequel tout vient se briser, ils repoussent toutes les charges de la cavalerie autrichienne, et ils servent d'appui à la division du général Monnier, qui revenait de Castel-Novo-di-Scrivia." - Evan |
nvrsaynvr | 29 Feb 2008 12:24 p.m. PST |
Evan, since this comes up, as you say, ritualistically, is there any chance you could put it all together and leave it on a forum like perhaps the Napoleon Series? NSN |
chasseur a cheval | 29 Feb 2008 2:28 p.m. PST |
Sault NSN The Nap. Series ? No way ! I have a huge problem with their moderation. I used to post sourced "academic", non-polemic stuff there. Mostly just verbatim translations (of
. French sources, since the English ones dont, er ah,
. need translation). Their fair-haired favorite boy Digby Smith insulted me up one side of the street and down the other since I did not find enough "dirt" on Napoelon and his allegedly orge-ish ways. Personally hostile, dememaning, nasty bitchy comments. Repeatedly. I asked the so-called moderators to please police the matter per their polcies, and they refused. So they can go hang themselves for all I care. If you want original research on the Nap. Series, go ask Digby Smith
. you might have to wait a while though. Two more for examples : Murat (16 June 1800) "Les grenadiers à pied des Consuls que vous m'avez envoyés, ont soutenu à la droite plusieurs charges de cavalerie l'arme au bras, et ont arrêté pendant longtemps le succès de l'ennemi. Ce corps a perdu 121 hommes tués ou blessés. Je lui dois des éloges particuliers" Petit (grenadiers à cheval) "Les grenadiera à pied de la Garde consulaire arrivent en ce moment tels qu'à la parade, ils défílent avec ordre, et marchant d'un pas rapide à l'ennemi qu'ils rencountrent à cent pas de notre front. Sans artillerie, sans cavalerie, en nombre de cinq cents seulement, ils ont à soutenir le choc impétuex et terrible d'une armée victorieuse. Mais, sans faire attention à leur nombre, ils avancent encore, tout cêde leur passage; 1'Aigle altier plane alors autour d'eux et memace de les déchirer. Le premier boulet qu'ils reçoivent emporte trois Grenadiers et un Fourrier en serre-file. Charges trois fois par la cavalerie, fusillés par l'infanterie à cinquante pas, ils entourent leurs drapeaux et leurs blessés, en bataillon quarré, épuisent leurs cartouches, se batent lentement et avec ordre, et rejoignent notre arrière-garde étonné." Ok, I think every one gets the general idea. This is the point that Dave claims that these and all the other "French" sources are (variously) lying, mistaken, couldnt see, copying each other and repeating Bonapartist propaganda. Then Philippe and/or I post another batch. Then Dave declares "victory", assumedly because we didnt produce a videotape or something. It is a neat "lawyers'" tactic, like asking "where are the memoires ?" from illiterate and dead men. And so Dave goes merrily on with his "version" of the events. This works for him since people think that there is a "pony" somewhere in all this detail, most of it in foreign languages. The more detail, the greater the general confusion and that "pony" starts looking pretty reasonable. But please, go back to my summmary, my first post. There, without a huge blur of claims, counterclaims and source quotes, is the outline of Dave's approach, and the areas that I find grossly problematic. - Evan - Evan |
chasseur a cheval | 29 Feb 2008 2:29 p.m. PST |
PS – Dave is either banned or not-participating at the Nap. Series, so it would also not be fair to post there. - Evan |
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | 29 Feb 2008 5:34 p.m. PST |
Evan – I am still working througha very lengthy response, but please explain to me one thing. The French propaganda machine went to a lot of work – the Bulletin, the material fed to the British Military Library and Neue Bellona, the creation of Petit (a Guard cavalryman) and his translation for hte publication in New York followed of course by the Official reports. The piece in the BML (which is used by Nosworthy for anyone's easier access) includes the eyewitness account of an officer of the 28e of his march to Alessandria as a prisoner when the final phase takes hold. Yet, no-one of the 500+ produces anything on their own or is mentioned anywhere – these guysw ere from Paris, raising their likelihood of education, and they had their own officers. If we are to accept that an event happened, we must find positive evidence of it happening. This is the suppsoed key event of the day – much lauded in various "reports". Where is this eyewitness/participant account? If it doiesn'te xist, what does that make the claims of those, who use the material, but did not witness the event? Start with that – someone, anyone? |
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | 29 Feb 2008 5:37 p.m. PST |
I was banned by Burnham from the NSF because he took offence at being told that a senior US military staff officer amnd I agreed with something when he disagreed. Howie Muir said I could post now "within the rules", when i asked him to remove certain unsubstantiated remarks by Tony Broughton. He declined – I could not be bothered. Someone else offered an answer top Digby's request for info on Austrian guns with the DD&S book and was deleted on the grounds that it was apparentlya wind-up against Kevin! Some things ain't worth the bother. |
ochoin | 29 Feb 2008 6:32 p.m. PST |
Hi, Oliver, a "granite fort" is praise, of course. But from a Bulletin? You don't think this might be that journal's attempt to talk up a near-disaster? donald |
chasseur a cheval | 29 Feb 2008 6:51 p.m. PST |
Dave, For not the first time
. "French propaganda machine went to a lot of work" This is your conclusion, your invention, your idea. I dont think you can just claim such a thing even existed without some sources for it. What machine ? What department of government, taking what actions, staffed by which people, acting under which laws and orders, with what budget ? Now, yes, the First Consul and then the Empereur re-wrote the staff report. That is one man re-writing, not a machine. And I did not list the re-written stuff nor the Bulletins among the "French sources". So, you make a huge assumption about some "machine" , then start assuming the listed "French sources" , from Victor to Soult, to a simple grenadier à cheval, to a contemporary Italian nationalist historian, to Murat, to an Austrian regimental historian are part this supposed machine. Are all these assumptions of yours "impossible" ? No -- you are not a raving lunatic. But is to me unfathomably UNLIKELY, and completely UNSOURCED. ==================================== "we must find positive evidence of it happening. " OK, I buy that. I quoted 9 sources in answer to your question : who says the garde à pied valiantly resisted cavalry ? (most specifying "in square"). Without being snarky, is something "evidence" only if you like what the source says ? Now, you can only be convinced if a memorialist from the battalion wrote something ? If you think that Parisians born in the mid-1700's to such social classes as entered the ranks of the army were literate in any measurable degree, you are really grasping at straws. The first daily newspaper in Paris started publication only 1777. Literacy was on the order of 60%, at the most basic level including the ability to sign one's name. The social class stratification of literacy was steep. The poor were illiterate, the nobles literate and the bourgeosie of mixed capability. The army recruited the rankers from among the poor. You might like : The Ancien Régime: A History of France Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie (1996) That leaves the officers. I suppose the obvious point of their being DEAD before anyone ever did anything but praise and reward them is not enough for you ? You want their mouldering corpses to leap from their crypts in protest of Hüffer's publication 100 years later ???? This is classic "Dave strawman", composed of the straws previously grasped, I am sure. It cheapens your analysis, and makes people respect your work less than I do. We all know that FEW battalions in FEW battles are represented by memorialists. For example, 2 battalions of the Splenyi, one of the Fröhlich and the several squadrons the cavalry under Frimont left us exactly
. ZERO memoirs. Let's try to elevate this discussion a little this time, out of respect to the readers if for no other reason. I posted your sources that mentioned the garde à pied, with links to the original and a translation here for the readers. I even posted your vaunted "regimental tradition". I did not gainsay ONE WORD of these sources. So, do you have any more SOURCES that mention the garde à pied ? You dont have to craft a lengthy "explanation" for intelligent readers. Let's just give them the sources and them decide and we can save time and not look like bickering children. As we say in New York : "It is what it is." Is that a good idea ? - Evan |
ochoin | 29 Feb 2008 7:01 p.m. PST |
Hi, Evan, this is so much like the Good Old Days at the Nap-Series. We share a few jokes, float a few opinions, you give us sources & try to keep dave honest. Good times, good times
. donald |
chasseur a cheval | 29 Feb 2008 7:17 p.m. PST |
Donald, It is deja vu all over again. I love the ritual chant requesting the DEAD garde à pied officers to answer Stutterheim. We used have that as the "Stutterheim Challenge", but I suppose Dave sold the rights for that name to Pepsi. Dave was so proud of that one that he still cant let it go, even though I actually looked up the officers in question, with the help Graf Mark W., and confirmed that the poor old men were indeed quite as DEAD as the Monty Python parrot. I think we can look forward now to a review of the courrier distances and times and related "calculations" that "prove" a late start and late arrival (Item 1. from my original summary). Although we may first get the ritual invocations (not quotations, Phillippe or I will have to find these for Dave, since has only his notes) about men who "must be" from the garde, according to Dave, even though that identification is NOT made in the original source. I really like that part. Some of the invocations are obscure, and I may not have all of the ready to posted in English, so that the readers can actually see the amazing ABSENCE of reference to the garde à pied. :-) - Evan |
Arteis | 29 Feb 2008 7:26 p.m. PST |
Dave said: "I am still working through a very lengthy response" Dave, your description of 'lengthy' does not bode well! Please can you keep it to the point
in fact, if you do exactly as Evan suggests above, I think it might actually be a much more useful reply. In the end, spending your time on a 'lengthy' reply is going to be an utter waste of time, because I can't see anyone here ever changing their minds, and I doubt there'll be anything new that you'll be bringing up at length that you haven't repeated time and time again over the last few years. |
chasseur a cheval | 29 Feb 2008 7:46 p.m. PST |
Awaiting the torturous (if not tortious) "lengthy response", maybe the readers will like the biography of Soulès, the commander of the "battallion" of the garde à peid which we discussing : link link He retired from active service 1n 1808, then a général and commander of the chasseurs à pied de la garde, age 48. He was later made a comte. He sat on trial of maréchal Ney, and voted for innocence. - Evan |
Philippe Aube | 01 Mar 2008 12:52 a.m. PST |
Good day to everyone, I think a lengthy answer from David Hollins would do no good. It would be better, in my opinion, for him to answer a few short questions about sources that David Hollins discarded as French propaganda and his Austrians sources. 1.a. What does the "Neue Bellona" (a German newpaper published around 1801) says about the battle (I have yet to find it) ? 1.b. What does make David Hollins believe that this was French propaganda ? 2. The "Europäische Annalen" state that the Grenadiers de la Garde des Consuls fought gallantly in an oblong square. What does make David Hollins believe that this was French propaganda ? 3. I suppose David Hollins read the Hermann Hüffer analysis of the Stutterheim accounts (which I could not read myself). Can he tell us what were the result of this analysis ? These are the questions that seem, to me the most important ones. Not just for the Marengo debate, but for the study of the period as a whole. Because the German newspapers are a source that *seems* neutral and could be used as a valuable source. Hermann Hüffer was an historian, while most French "historians" of the same era are military people, mostly interested in making the Napoleon campaign an illustration for lessons about warfare (Bonnal, Camon, Colin, etc.). So Hüffer analysis is most important. |
Oliver Schmidt | 01 Mar 2008 2:13 a.m. PST |
Donald, in Germany in 1813, there was as an expression "lying like a bulletin" for someone bluntly lying and denying the obvious truth. From the few bulletins I read here and there, my impression is (I can be wrong) that one structural component of them is to try to catch the imaginaton of the reader by telling something unique about the battle (granit redoubt at Marengo, Senarmont's attack etc.). This "unique fact" can be real or it can be invented, or embellished from an episode which really happened – we have to check with other sources to get an idea. After all, bulletins are primarily written to influence public opinion, and are more a piece of literature than a historical report. Cheers, Oli Here the link again to the "Bulletin de l'armée de Réserve" of 15th June 1800: link |
chasseur a cheval | 01 Mar 2008 2:19 a.m. PST |
Bonjour Phillippe, Here is a better link (I think the other was wrong) for the Hüffer : link
You will see that there is little discussion. It is like the de Cugnac, mostly just source material. Mélas' march orders are there – with the amazingly confusing order of battle used by the Austrians. I call it march orders, but it was his idea of giving battle orders, as far as I can tell. The Neipperg is there, in French. Near the end, in English, is some of the correspndence of Lord Paget in Naples. Oddly, his first report back to Britain had Mélas captured and blamed the defeat on Nobili's incompetence or cowardice. Bien à vous, - Evan |
chasseur a cheval | 01 Mar 2008 2:24 a.m. PST |
Salut Oliver, The Bulletins, and the consular and I perial re-writing of the staff reports, are favorite targets of Dave to lable "propaganda", "lying" , etc., etc. over and over again, year after year. But this is a pure 100% straw man. You will note that neither Phillippe nor I EVER refer to or quote these. Not that there might not be some truth in them, but just to try to avoid the question of the truth in them. - Evan |
Billy Bones | 01 Mar 2008 2:57 a.m. PST |
Hello Dave, If you do not mind me asking what were the remarks made by Tony Broughton that made you complain to the editors of the NSF. They must have been quite offensive and after reading the stick that you get on various forums concerning your books I am certainly interested in what he said. Wagram |
chasseur a cheval | 01 Mar 2008 3:29 a.m. PST |
Salut Wagram, I wondered also, I must admit. I have corresponded with Mr. Broughton times without number, over what must now be over a decade. Indeed, it was his kindnesses with his generous gift of time, his research acumen and his gentlemanly good-nature that were so marked as to help re-awaken my childhood interest in this era. Dave DOES rub people the wrong way easily (OK, VERY easily). But I just cannot imagine a word or even a thought of Mr. Broughton's that any one other than a raving lunatic could really make a complaint about. I am sure that it is all just mis-communication. If you do speak with Mr. Broughton, please do give him my best and most respectful regards. - Evan |
ochoin | 01 Mar 2008 4:01 a.m. PST |
Hi, Oli, You still hear the phrase "to lie like a Bulletin" in Australia in 2008. At least in certain circles. I do, indeed, know they are to be handled carefully. They are quite artistic pieces of work often embellishing factual material with a considered bit of propaganda. I must admit, I'm not overly familiar with German newspapers but the Bulletins are not unlike the cruder tabloids of Britain & Australia today. "Spin" is not a new concept. regards, donald BTW thanks for the link. You are, as always, exceedingly kind. |
hos459 | 01 Mar 2008 4:24 a.m. PST |
Yeah, we've heard the comments 'lie like a bulletin' many times. No doubt much in them is less than truthful. By the same token, I regularly hear the comments that "nothing a lawyer/politician/real estate agent/reporter says can be trusted". Not sure either comments indicate either source(s) are totaly without any merit or usefulness, so long as they are not treated as gospel but merely as one more source. Daryl |
ochoin | 01 Mar 2008 4:42 a.m. PST |
Actually Daryl, I was alluding to the recently defunct Australian news magazine 'The Bulletin' which, according to some, has a left-wing bias. In general, I think it is a human failing to be readily seduced by a slick campaign that appeals to our baser natures. We truly want to believe, often to our cost. This is what keeps lawyers/politicians/real estate agents/ corrupt priests in business. Sorry for the lecture: I should go to CA maybe. donald |
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | 01 Mar 2008 4:46 a.m. PST |
Arteis – There is no short answer, as the issues are long and complex. Do you for example know why Mras and Stutterheim give differing versions of the units involved and why both wrongly include the 8. Nauendorff Hussars with the resulting overflow into irrelevant discussions about Dampierre? Your conclusion is probably right however. Evan – "You will note that neither Phillippe nor I EVER refer to or quote these" (Bulletin) – unfortunate really as this and the subsequent material, released under the hand of Foudras is the origin of the tale. Can you produce an account of the events from an eyewitness or participanty as opposed to what has been copied from the Bulletin and propaganda? Something, anything? You see the problem with repeating material without appreciating its origin or purpose. Wagram – Broughton is just sulking over a few documents Terry turned up , which we will not release for the time being. To accuse me of never revealing the sourcing is just trying to smear me. It is unfortunate as I gather he is in touch with Ferdi Wober and presumably going to the Vienna meeting in early June 09. |
Philippe Aube | 01 Mar 2008 5:27 a.m. PST |
Bonjour Evan, I can't access the book you pointed me to. This maybe because I try to do it frmom France
The "Droit d'auteur" and copyright notions are quite different, and may explain why the text cannot read from France. Anyway, I am surprised that you get only texts, and no analysis from professor Hermann Hüffer. I have a review of his work by "revues" published in 1902, and it praises the quality and depth of his analysis. It states that the compilation of text is completed by analysis and notes that are very illuminating. I would love to read those notes ! See "Revue Historique" (janv.-avr. 1902 ; Année 27 / T. 78), it can be read on Gallica. There are also other authors that are mentionned. They are said, in the review, to give contemporary account of the battle : Saint Julien, Hohenzollern-Hechingen. I would also like to know if the Neipperg document is the letter that I read in the "Revue de Paris". I would also like to read the Pittagula documents published in Italy for the centenary
|
von Winterfeldt | 01 Mar 2008 6:09 a.m. PST |
@Phillipe Aube Try a proxy server – then you can download, I just did Hüffner. sureproxy.com |
Oliver Schmidt | 01 Mar 2008 9:10 a.m. PST |
Evan, I just put up the bulletin as a kind of (beautiful) illustration of what Dave is trying to disprove. Of course, it is just one source between others, and has to be judged in the context of all other sources. Maybe, this bulletin is even right describing the on the "redoute de granit". Concerning German newspapers of the period, I doubt they will contribute much of worth. Reporting about battles, sometimes they contain private letters of paricipants, but more frequently they just copy the official bulletins .. |
chasseur a cheval | 01 Mar 2008 10:58 a.m. PST |
Dave, I know that you do see the problems in smearing (in this case 11 "French" sources) witt the condemnation : "the Bulletins lied, therefore all these copied the bulletins and are there fore lies" : > several of the pieces quoted were written before the Bulletin > the text of none of them are matches the text in the Buletin > several of the pieces quoted explicitly claim to have been eye witnesses > several of the sources were clearly anti-Bonapartists > the 11 sources do not have a common text among them, not even common expressions, and agree only in a summary or overview sense > you have NEVER OFFERED ANY SOURCE MATERIAL AT ALL that gainsays anything these 11 sources say on this topic The last point is what makes your smear, your response of "guilt by asociation" so loathesome, when one might have expected your disagreement to be based on one or more SOURCES. I printed the two alleged "Stutterheim" manuscripts, the Mras and even the "tradition" from the regimental history that you have adduced. You cant hide in a smoke scren created by the obscurity of these sources – we can just read them. And they don't gainsay the 11 "French" sources, they only add detail about how the garde à pied was finally defeated. So against 11 offered "French" sources all saying the same thing (in different ways), plus your proffered 3 "Austrian" sources which do not contradict the "French" ones, all you can offer is a chant of "propaganda", "lies", etc. It is jejeune, Dave, and makes you look duller than you really are when everyone can actually read the sources for themselves. Let's try to upgrade this a little. If you have more SOURCES on the topic that you want people to look at, proffer them. - Evan PS – Do you have any idea how the first reports to Lord Paget in Naples managed to blame the Marengo defeat on Nobili being incompetent or a coward (as I noticed at the end of the Hüffer), just as Botta explicitly blamed Nobili's commander Elsnitz? It seems the cause of the Austrian defeat was though of in a rather specific way in Italy immediately after the battle. You do realize that the "French sources" claim the delay for the valiant resistance to Austrian horse caused by the garde à pied was an important feature of the battle. I wonder, as purely a speculation, if the Austrian reports were later "cleaned up" to provide less blame on these two officers ? Or do you believe that only French lie in Bulletins ? |
chasseur a cheval | 01 Mar 2008 11:11 a.m. PST |
It is interesting ot note that the early reports to Lords Paget are said also to say that Mélas AND his generla staff were captured. And we know this part is wrong. But in a German manuscript "headquarters and Mélas" might be something like "Hauptquartier u. Mélas" and "headquarters of Mélas" might be something like "Hauptquartier v. Mélas" or some such. So crossing a "u." with a "v." in a manuscript writen in haste. Interessierend, nicht-wahr ? - Evan |
Philippe Aube | 01 Mar 2008 11:25 a.m. PST |
Thank you von Winterfeldt, I was able, at last, to put my eyes of Hüffer's opus. Unfortunately, most of the text is in German, and I cannot read it myself. So I read the Neipperg part "Aperçus sur la bataille de Marengo
" The only part written in French. I was surprised to find that it was slightly different to the version I read in the "Revue de Paris". In fact, it seems that there is only one difference, and it is very important for what we are discussing here. In the Hüffer version (p108), there is a text between parenthesis : "Ces mêmes chasseurs de Bussy qui manoeuvrèrent ensuite pour se rapprocher de la colonne Ott, se couvrirent de gloire en détruisant une grande partie des Grenadiers de la garde consulaire, et en leur enlevant quatre canons". Translation :"Those very same Chasseurs de Bussy who maneuvered to get closer to the Ott column, covered themselves with glory by destroying a big part of the Consular Garde, and taking four guns from them." Now, I have several remarks to add. 1. The author of the "Revue de Paris" article is not aware of the Hüffer version. He believes this text was never published (Henry Prior dates his article 1905). 2. He says that the text is a manuscript found in a collection of papers held in Italy. The text belonged to the collection by, at least, 1815 (so it is older than that). 3. There is one occurence where he could not understand an abreviation for bataillon (in the Hüffer version, the abreviation is understood). So it seems he really worked on a manuscript text. Now my questions for the ones litterate enough to read the Hüffer text. Does the professor tell what document he worked on ? Is there a date ? Was it a manuscript ? Thanks. |
Billy Bones | 01 Mar 2008 11:28 a.m. PST |
Hello Evan, I will certainly give your regards to Tony when I see him next I am sure he will send his. I to was suprised at Daves statement unfortunately we will never no what new information Dave and his freind Terry have come across as they never seem to reveal it I am sure they will do one day. Unfortunately Dave explained they had given up on the Hardback edition of Marengo he explained they were into spys now. Wagram |
von Winterfeldt | 01 Mar 2008 11:32 a.m. PST |
@Philippe Aube A manuscript is a document in handwriting, I will check out Hüffner and also look at the German texts. |
Billy Bones | 01 Mar 2008 11:41 a.m. PST |
Hello Dave, I was in contact with Tony a few weeks ago and I he did not mention going to Vienna in June 09. When I see him next I will ask him about the mysterious new information that Terry as managed to unearth I know he has never mentioned it to me possibly he his as you say sulking. He does not seem to post on any forums these days apart from the occasional post on the NSF. |
von Winterfeldt | 01 Mar 2008 12:19 p.m. PST |
@Philippe Aube Hüffer's work is really great – a worthy compagnion of De Cugnac. You were also right that it is not just a list of documents but also a discussion of them, Hüffer gives as source of Neipperg report – the "Schriftstück" – piece of writing – in the Kriegsarchiv, it exists in Italien 1800, Feldakten VI, 566 and Feldakten XIII, 82, the last copy – Abschrift – was signed by Neipperg and were from his own "Verlassenschaft" – I guess Hüffer means "Nachlass" – succession |
von Winterfeldt | 01 Mar 2008 12:24 p.m. PST |
@Philippe Aube To add – Hüffer thinks – due to the rank of Neipperg and the unit her served in, Neipperg signed as Major d'Ott hussards – that the document was writing in between 1801 and 1804 (where Neipperg was transfert as lt- colonel to the Schwarzenberg Ulanen at the 31.st of July 1804 |
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | 01 Mar 2008 1:26 p.m. PST |
Neipperg was on the staff and is of no real value. Saint-Julien is not the one leading the pursuit; both this one and H-H were not at Marengo. They have useful material about the campaign, but not on the battle. To take up Arteis' point (and answer Phillipe), it is perhaps best to understand the propaganda background to all this. The campaign as make or break for Napoleon – fail and it was all over. The news of the victory of Aboukir was planted – check the ships arriving in Corsica and those arriving in Frejus to see that as despatch boat has gone missing and the message itself is addressed to a the named commander at Toulon. A series of Bulletins and proclamations reports the coup and promises peace, while all the time, N is refusing any peace with Thugut. Then there are the proclamations en route into Italy and the letter to Joseph, declaring "I have descended on Italy like a bolt out of the blue." All propaganda, but no-one blames Nap – his neck was on the line. He and those associated with him, namely the Guard and 72e (a unit named by Berthier as a suitable special reserve) had to be seen to do well. So, how does the story develop? On the evening of the 14th, Nap dismisses Kellerman's charge and turns to Bessieres saying that he thought the Guard did rather well that day. On the 14th, nothing. Berthier writes: "Notre gauche a fait un mouvement de retraite, soutenu par la cavalerie; le centre a suivi ce mouvement, et notre droite, combattant avec avantage, a arrêté les progrès que l'ennemi cherchait à faire pour tourner notre droite qui, soutenue par les grenadiers de la garde des Consuls, a maintenu sa position jusqu'au moment de l'arrivée de la division Boudet, aux ordres du général Desaix" Just a support to the right, which apparently held its position until Desaix arrived – except that the whole army retreated a long way back in between! The Bulletin of the 15th says: "Four times during the battle we were in retreat and four times we advanced. At different points and different times more than 60 guns were taken and retaken. There were more than 12 cavalry charges with varying success. At 3.00 p.m. 10,000 cavalry outflanked our right in this superb plain of San Giuliano. They were supported by a line of infantry and much artillery. The Grenadiers of the Guard were placed like a granite redoubt in the midst of this immense plain; nothing could breach it. Cavalry, infantry, artillery all were hurled at this battalion; but in vain. Then indeed one saw what a handful of brave men can do. This stubborn resistance held the left wing of the enemy and supported our right until the arrival of Général Monnier, who took the village of Castel Ceriolo at the point of the bayonet. The enemy cavalry then made a rapid movement against our left, which was already shaken; this attack precipitated its retreat." First problem – Monnier had to seize Castel Ceriolo and then be evicted from it before Ott could advance Schellenberg's column through and down towards the Guard's final position. Second problem – the left collapses after the Guard arrives, yet Coignet and the left wing were back in the vines when the infantry arrived. However the Guard are just a "granite redoubt" and go unmentioned by Dupont. An officer who was present says on the 19th: Le général Bonaparte s'était porté à 9 heures sur le champ de bataille. Nous étions au centre. La droite avait eu besoin de renforts. On y avait envoyé les grenadiers à pied. Ils ont soutenu, pendant plusieurs heures, le feu de l'artillerie, celui de plusieurs régiments et des charges de cavalerie, sans reculer d'un pas. Ils ont eu le tiers de leurs forces hors de combat. So, suddenly Nap is leaving Torre di Garrofoli at 9 am despite Berthier arriving there some time before 11 am to tell him things were getting serious. Here the Guard is heroic, taking artillery fire "for several hours". Poor old Berthier is getting in muddle in his report of the battle, written by Bourienne, on the 20th : "Les grenadiers de la garde du Consul marchent pour appuyer la droite; ils s'avancent et soutiennent trois charges successives. Au même moment arrive la division Monnier qui faisait partie de la réserve. Je dirige deux demi-brigades sur le village de Castel-Ceriolo, avec ordre de charger les bataillons qui soutiennent la cavalerie ennemie. Ce corps traverse la plaine et s'empare de Castel-Ceriolo après avoir repoussé une charge de cavalerie; mais notre centre et notre gauche continuant leur mouvement rétrograde," Now suddenly the Guard has marched and taken three charges before Monnier even marches to Castel Ceriolo. Might it be worth noting that on the very same day in Milan, Rivaud writes to Berthier: "le général Rivaud a soutenu, avec deux bataillons, trois charges d'infanterie faites sur lui et une de cavalerie" Lannes' report is quite illuminating: Néanmoins, je dois vous dire que la 28e a montré un sang-froid des plus rares dans tous les divers mouvements en présence de la cavalerie ennemie; et cela est dû au brave chef qui la commande et au citoyen Taupin, chef de bataillon de ce corps
.L'artillerie des Consuls, commandée par le citoyen Marin, lieutenant, a fait beaucoup de mal à l'ennemi; elle a arrêté une colonne pendant près de deux heures. This latter places the Guard artillery on Lannes' right helping to hold off Gottesheim's advance-guard. That is of course exactly where the Guard infantry moved to and there is the 28e, who did indeed fight bravely all day in a square on their own with little ammunition. Quiot (Victor's ADC) talks of "two battalion squares" in the area – that could not be the Guard alone, since they are only one battalion strong and so, shows them in square up alongside the square of 28e. Writing about 5 days after the battle, having not been present. Broussier only mentions the Guard in the context of the evening and says: "Le citoyen Soules, commandant des grenadiers de la garde consulaire, s'est couvert de gloire et s'est montré digne chef de cette troupe intrépide." How about the awards? 8 initially: [6 fusils d'honneur] sergent-major DEGLAS; sergent MIRABEL; caporal RITER; Sappeur BOUCHER; chasseur CARLIN; grenadier Augustin Noel. [2 Baguettes d'honneur] Tambour SAYER; Tambour AVOINE. here are 8 men notable enough to get awards plus the (presumably literate) officers – not one gets a citation or gives an account anywhere. By late summer 1800, thoughts are turning to some propaganda as the war is quiet, but might flare up again. Citizen Foudras writes "Campagne de Bonaparte en Italie en l'an VIII de la Republique" and translates it into English in the British Military Library, Vol 2 No.25 published in Oct 1800 (referred to in Nosworthy for easy reference). It is in here that the story of the heroic 72e turning their 3rd rank round first appears with the Bussy twirling captured bearskins at the Guard in the evening. I only have my notes from the piece, but he talks about Lannes being used to stem the Austrian advance from Marengo. Watrin's division plus the 28e were taking repeated shocks and were on the point of having their flank turned by a detached body [Gottesheim] when Champeaux came to their aid with a Dragoon division [ie: his cavalry under Murat]. Then he talks about the 72e and then all I have is "CG go forward" and Brabant first appears here. I recall that allegedly the Guard lost just a handful of men and prisoners, but I am not sure whether a square is even mentioned. That needs checking. Then Foudras goes on to tell the story of an officer from the 28e, who is being marched back to Alessandria as a prisoner when he is carried along by the Austrian panic at the end of the battle. Finally of course, we have Petit, the French version being published in Paris in 1801 and then translated by Foudras and published in New York. Info would be feed to the Neue Bellona from probably the 1800 propaganda or possibly Petit. Petit admits to getting help with his version of 1801 and it is here the square appears (subject to anything, which may be in Foudras). In this tale, the French army is in headlong retreat by 1 pm and then the guard infantry arrive – behind Petit – and go straight into action. Petit tells of three men being hit by a cannonball in this first advance to help Lannes and overall, he takes Broussier's 258+ "hors de combat". An hors de combat is a loss in combat – it does not mean dead or wounded. However, as he includes the figure and Murat's figure is kicking about, that presents a problem compared with Foudras. He also says "500 men" – now this is a problem as it could be accurate as Soules' battalion or it could be included to justify Nap's condemnation of the guy abandoned in the farm, who was told that 500 of the Guard go out. He also cites the Berthier three cavalry charges – by what cavalry exactly? So, we have a few tales of the guard being brave up on Lannes' right and a story in Petit, which bears a close resemblance to the heroics of the 28e, who are widely praised. We have 8 men with awards and several officers, but no-one is cited or gives an account. In fact, we have a story,. which ahs progressively materialised in official documents, nothing else. The problem with all the accounts is that they include both primary and secondary material, the latter being used to set the scene and make the account read well. That is not a problem per se – but it means it is essential to strip out the primary from the secondaryas the latter will come from accessible sources. For example, Général Kellermann recalled in his 1828 pamphlet ‘Refutation sur le Duc de Rovigo' that he saw "the corps of the Garde Consulaire sacrificing itself, and struggling vainly to stop the torrent". What he says about the Guard later was what he added from the official output as he did not see it and thus it has no evidential value. Likewise for reasons I will explain, Stutterheim and Mras identify the 8. Nauendorff Hussars as being involved, but this is derived from a misunderstanding of another account and so, likewise is of no value. Once you can spot verbatim text, it is no good. Turning to time, Monnier's report is a major problem: La division arriva hier sur le champ de bataille, à 2 heures après-midi; elle fut dirigée sur notre droite, où l'ennemi s'avançait en force. Don't forget that Monnier has to march up to Castel Ceriolo, take it (for an hour according to Monnier) and then be evicted before Schellenberg's column can move south. It is about 10km from Torre di Garrofoli to the gap in the vines along a badly maintained road. That is about 17,000 paces – or roughly a three hour march on a parade ground. Monnier has arrived at about 2pm, so leaving at 11 am is possible and still has to reach Castel Ceriolo and fight there. The Guard only arrive – says Coignet – when the left has collapsed and Lannes is in trouble and go straight into action (Petit). There is fighting in that area up to 3pm and the so-called victory letter is written at 2.45 pm. The Guard cannot have arrived before Monnier or the Guard cavalry. Secondly, to say the Guard saved the day from 1 pm onwards does down the considerable achievement of Rivaud, Lannes etc. and requires a 90 min "Lull" in the battle after the Guard episode. No-one mentions that, whereas Soult says there is smoke in the area where the episode happened around 4 p.m. These battles have to make sense and units must arrive in the right order. |
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
|