"Battle of Leipzig." Topic

One of the most huge Nap Battles, but when was the "momentum" when that battle was lost?.

Four days of hard fighting and Nap said that we was winning but always was lost when the Saxon defeated.

Was this correct?. Or the french lost the battle before?.

And another question:

Why Schwarzemberg instead of launch most of his huge Army directly to the Polish/French positions, he didn't send more troops to encircle the enemy Army at Leipzig by his left?.
Was it a big mistake which allow Nap and the remanents of his Army to scape or was decided by the Allied Sovereigns to allow Nap to scape?.

Amicalement
Armand

At least those who can't stick Napoleon can be bothered to type out which ever version of di Buonaparte is their preference. Could you not manage 'Napoleon' even the once?

I suppose it's better than 'Nappy'

Just

Dear Armand
The battle was lost before the Saxon's defected. They were fighting in their own country that had been devastated by both sides. Saxony suffered at the hands of the French and the Coalition Allies.

It was a no win position for the King of Saxony. Prussia wanted Saxony as their price for Poland going to the Russians.

The problems over command and control let alone the rather reluctant Bernadotte did not assist. I still do not understand that the pursuit was so poor permiting the French Army to defeat the outnumbered Austro-Bavarian army at Hanau. It is so interesting looking at that battle in a fair non-partisan manner.

1. The Bavarian Artillery kept the French at bay until they ran out of amunition. Their guns were a different calibre to their Austrian Allies.
2. The French did not have to cross the river so GL von Wrede had to take a position in front of the river.
3. He expected to be fighting fugitives that would be closely pressed.
4. It seems that only the Imperial Guard was in an organised state. The Bavarian Army was inexperienced and faced experienced foes.

The battle lasted two days. In that time you would have expected the Austro-Prusso-Russian pursuit to be a factor. It was not.

Stephen

"Why Schwarzemberg instead of launch most of his huge Army directly to the Polish/French positions, he didn't send more troops to encircle the enemy Army at Leipzig by his left?."

First, the ground on the west bank of the river was mostly woods and swamps, and so not very good country for formed troops.

You also need to remember that Napoleon was the son-in-law of the Austrian Emperor, and so France was a potential future ally against the Russians and Prussians. European dynastic politics were such that everyone had to consider that their enemy during this war might be their friends during the next. So if the Austrians are suspicious of the Russians and Prussians (they were) then they didn't necessarily want to destroy Napoleon and his army, as they might make useful allies in future.

The terrain on Schwarzenberg's left was very thick and there were many streams/rivers to be crossed. Small forces probed the area trying to find a way across, but the larger troop formations could not navigate it efficiently.

Also, at this time, the allies really were just trying to shepherd Nappy back to France. They really weren't in a position to push him hard. The battle took place over 4 days, but one of those days was a mostly rest day for the armies.

This is a very good book on the whole battle: link

I think we get a bit casual today about our communications technology and ability to capture and quickly process intelligence information. Give the limited technology of the times I think it was pretty amazing that both the Allies and the French were actually able to bring so many resources to bear at Leipzig at all, much less co-ordinate it all and manouvre perfectly. Hind-sight is a wonderful thing.