"Turenne vrs Conde" Topic

Was one better than the other?

Define 'better'

Was one a more able as a general /great captain? Or were they equal – the right and left arms of France.

Turenne. Conde was wasteful of troops and other resources.

It was said at the time if you wanted to win a battle you looked to Conde. If you want to win a campaign you looked to Turrene.

Turenne master of manoeuvres and Conde master of battles.

Would Turenne had of fought at Rocroi?

On the hold Louis XIV was lucky in the beginning of his reign to have Conde, Turenne and in the middle Luxembourg and Catinat. Imagine if they were more spread out. The later generation not as good – Tallard, Villeroi and Vendôme. Except maybe Villars.

Makes one think Conde and Turenne vrs Marlborough and Eugene.

Conde made a number of frontal attacks on entrenched enemy. The flanking move at Rocroi was an exception. You'd think he would have repeated it more often.

Turenne made such frontal attacks only when he was under Conde and ordered to do so.

Conde had more style.

picture

Oh, I don't know, Turenne possessed a bit of style himself

picture

They are my two favorite commanders, but are to some degree opposite sides of the same coin:

Condé was a Prince of the Blood, the boy-general hero of Rocroi, and matched the French ideal of the beau sabreur. He led from the front, was charismatic enough to be welcomed back to Court after aligning himself first with the Frondé rebels and then with the Spanish (and was defeated by Turenne), and it was said that he was as brilliant in his last battle as he was in his first. He had three horses shot out from under him at the Battle of Seneffe and he led his last cavalry charge in the Rhineland suffering from severe gout, after leaving his carriage with one boot on.

Turenne was the grandson of William of Orange, a brilliant strategist, shared hardships with his men and was beloved for it, and would lead a decisive charge if the situation called for it. It was said of Turenne, "that his genius grew bolder as he grew older". Certainly his Rhineland Campaign of 1673 to his death in 1675 against the Elector of Brandenburg and Montecucculi was one of the most brilliant of his career. His campaign was considered a "secondary" campaign, as Louis was with Condé in the Netherlands and Alsace, and Louvois repeatedly refused requests for reinforcements and supplies. And yet he defeated Brandenburg and forced a peace, and outmaneuvered Montecucculi for almost all of the campaign, including a brilliant forced march in winter that resulted in the defeat of the Imperialists at Turkheim.

Upon Turenne's death, Montecucculi said, "A man is dead today who did honour to Man!"

In 1805 Bonaparte had Turenne's remains moved from the desecrated Abby of St. Denis to a permanent resting place in the Church of the Invalides. He also "recommended" that all soldiers read the "Campaigns of Turenne" and required it of his generals.

And interesting that a comparison to Marlborough was made, as young John Churchill received much of his battlefield experience and training serving under Turenne with the English Brigade in French service first at the Siege of Maastricht and then in the Rhineland Campaign.

I'll take Turenne (but wouldn't turn Condé away).

Bill
Sir William the Aged
warsoflouisxiv.blogspot.com

Ah! The age of the Sun King 1638 – 1715.

Sir William
Have you seen the board game by GMT Games called 'Under the Lilly Banners'. Features the earlier campaigns of Conde and Turenne during the TYW.

I believe that Louis XIV heard of Turenne death said "I would rather have lost a battle". And on the news of Conde's death stated "I have lost the greatest man in my Kingdom".

Cheers
Edward

I have always suspected that the reason that Conde was such a hero in France was that he beat the Spanish for the first time in about 150 years in a significant battle – Rocroi. Previously, the French had a very bad habit of losing almost every major battle to the Spanish and it had gotten to be quite embarrassing.

Being a Prince of the Blood helped a lot too.

I feel that Condé truly saw himself as a chevalier of France, and did everything but carry the Banner of St. Denis. That he beat the Spanish when nobody else had been able to was major; that he did it as a very young, unproven commander added to the mystique; that he was a Bourbon certainly didn't hurt his cause; and that he did it shortly after learning of Louis XIII's death and it was, therefore, Louis XIV's first victory (even though Louis was still a minor and subject to the Regency), tied Condé to Louis forever.

Throughout his life Condé could do no "major" wrong. He showed open resentment for his arranged marriage to someone he felt was beneath his station. He flaunted his mistresses openly, even in defiance of the Court. He was an active participant in the Frondé, even to allying himself with the Spanish for the Dunkirk campaign. He had to rely on Family influence to gain his audience with Louis, but once he threw himself on the mercy of the King and Court, was welcomed as the "return of the Prodigal Son". Later in life his closest companions were philosophers and writers who were not always in favor with the Court. As has been pointed out already, he was very wasteful of men and material and always favored the frontal charge.

Turenne may have left the Frondé to save the Queen, young Louis and the Court from the Paris mobs, but the fact that he remained a Protestant until very late in life always hurt him at Court. He was also usually at odds with first Mazarin and then Louvois over logistics and supply, and insisted on sharing hardships with his troops, not considered the proper conduct of a gentleman Marshal of France. His campaigns also were not usually, with a few exceptions, as flamboyant as those of Condé. Turenne preferred out-thinking, out-planning, and out-maneuvering his opponents to create the right situation for the "small battle" rather than the grand siege or charge.

Bill
Sir William the Aged
warsoflouisxiv.blogspot.com

Quite a helpful summary, Bill.

But did conde ever repeat the success of Rocroi? I don't believe he did.

"But did conde ever repeat the success of Rocroi?"

Passage of the Rhine 1672.

"But did conde ever repeat the success of Rocroi? I don't believe he did

You may want to check out Lens 1648 where Conde put in a better performance than at Rocroi. The battle also shows that Conde had learned when not to launch an attack as he declined to attack the Spanish in their original strong position.