"Broken Squares At Hanau 1813" Topic

The Napoleonistyka site refers here link to Bavarian cavalry routing 8 French squares (see para 2) on the one hand and Old Guard cavalry breaking 3 Bavarian squares (see para 9).
Can anyone shed any further light on these incidents?

This is the first reference to this I have seen. Certainly I will need to follow that up. Both seem to come from Bowden which is known to be a little colourful. Also whether they were actually formed squares.
Stephen

Nothing wrong with color, as long as it is accurate. It is certainly better than boring, which too many authors have a tendency to be, unfortunately.

If you are referring to the book Napoleon's Grande Armee of 1813 by Scott Bowden, then you are wrong as there is nothing in there regarding Hanau of French squares being broken.

I think the other reference – the Guard Cavalry breaking the Bavarian squares – comes from Marbot and the Bulletin?

Whirlwind, see Bowden and his footnotes about Bavarian squares being broken. The French Guard cavalry breaking the Bavarian squares comes from Parquin. Also refer to Petre.

Summerfield, Kiley is correct. There is no reference to French squares being broken in the source you mention.

Dunno about breaking French squares, but the best known image, Vernet's, shows how close the Bavarian and Austrian cavalry came to destroying the Guard Artillery and catching the odd French Marshal, in the process.

What reached the Guard artillery under Drouot was actually remnants that had been shot to pieces by that artillery. And the Guard artillery was then supported by the Guard cavalry which drove off the allied horsemen.

To state that the Guard artillery was almost destroyed is a stretch.

Which French marshal was almost captured at the Guard artillery gun line? Drouot was the commander of the Guard artillery in this action and I have never heard of any French marshal which was almost captured at Hanau.

@Richard Hensley – where in Parquin? I can't find it. I can find it in Marbot and in the Bulletin.

Does anyone know of any Allied sources for Hanau?

nice painting, I like the blue of the officier d'ordonnance, no Bavarian dragoons any more at Hanau though, their last campaign was that of 1809, later they were converted to Chevaulegers.

Yes the Drouot's artillery was savec by a timely rescue of French cavalry.

Here Bavarian Chevaulegers – from a battle painting of Kobell

despite the battle was a French success, in braking through, 4 French generals, 280 officers and over 10,000 soldiers were captured, a loss Boney could not afford

Source for the French casualties? And were they stragglers or not?

Wrede was basically run over by the French and badly defeated.

The Napoleonic Data Book by Digby Smith gives "impossible to establish accurately; generally given as 6000 killed nd wounded, 4000 captured, 5 guns lost"; his sources are Wrede, Martinien, Leyh, Muller

Petre gives the figure of 10000 prisoners, but covering the period 28th – 31st October as a whole rather than simply from the battle itself.

My sources

Geschichtliche Darstellungen der Schlacht bei Hanau am 30. Oktober 1813, von einem Augenzeugen, Hanau 1814

Historische Beiträge zur Geschichte der Schlacht bei Hanau am 30. und 31. Oktober 1813

in Mittheilungen des Hanauer Bezriksvereins für hessische Geschichte und Landeskunde.

Hanau 1863

Both are available at google books

As to Drouot – his guns were not protected and so vulnerable to be taken -
fortunately for him Nansouty arrived in time to safe the guns

…the enemy horsemen who followed, arrived almost on our guns it was a critical moment;
p. 198 observation of Drouots ADC Planat, cited from

Dawson, Paul Lindsey : Les Brutal – The Guard Foot Artillery 1797 to 1815, books on demand

The timely rescue is supported by other eye witnesses as well, as for example Griois

To add on

Friederich : Geschichte des Herbstfeldzuges 1813, volume 3, Berlin 1906, page 300 confirmes my sources above, prisoners taken from 28th to 31st of October 5 generals, 280 officers and about 10,000 soldiers, French losses estimated about 9000
losses of Allies 194 officers and 9087 soldiers(killed, wounded and missing)

to add, Plotho in his history about the campaigns of 1813 to 1814 (in German again ;-))
volume 2, page 462 lists at least 4 names of the generals captured

Martel, Meroni, St. Andree, Avesani

But the question was, and is somewhat answered now, though not directly, were the prisoners taken by the allies stragglers?

Seems that is so as the period covered was from 28-31 October 1813.

Artillery does not have to 'be protected' as their self-defense weapons are the field pieces themselves. They were supported by the Guard cavalry, who gobbled up the allied cavalry remnants who had actually made it to the gunline and were enthusiastically opposed by the gunners defending their pieces.

And arriving 'almost on our guns' does not indicate that the Guard artillery was nearly 'destroyed.'

…the enemy horsemen who followed, arrived almost on our guns, it was a critical moment; p. 198 observation of Drouot's ADC Planat, cited from

The observation of Drouot's ADC that the moment was critical does not tally with the interpretation that "they (the French Artillery) were supported by the Guard cavalry, who gobbled up the allied cavalry remnants who had actually made it to the gunline and were enthusiastically opposed by the gunners defending their pieces."

All this is by-the-by mind – what about the broken squares?! The narratives I have read appear to give a decisive victory to Napoleon and the French; I am very curious therefore as to when these squares were overthrown by this Bavarian cavalry.

I have no idea. It wasn't I who brought up the squares, broken or no. I was commenting on the Guard artillery under Drouot.

Perhaps you should do some work on Hanau and then find out how bad Wrede was actually defeated. He believed he was merely in the act of scooping up French stragglers, then the Imperial Guard and Napoleon showed up…

The look on Wrede's face would have been priceless…

Perhaps you should do some work on Hanau and then find out how bad Wrede was actually defeated.

Why the aggressiveness? I know how badly Wrede was defeated, it is hardly hidden in the history books.

I wouldn't mind some help on the details that I actually asked about though, if anyone has any leads.

I cannot take brech seriously, what does he know – other to attack people who have another opinion than him, he has the vain assumption that he is the world wide expert in everything, well leave him in this illusion.

Wrede was not badly defeated – he wasn't – look at the numbers engaged in that battle, as usual this legend of bad defeat is regurgitated without any reflection, he caused severe casualties – including POWS – about 20,000 – which Boney couldn't afford at all, without Wrede the rout of the Grande Armée after Leipzig whouldn't had been that catastrophic.

If Wrede did so well, why wasn't Napoleon stopped at Hanau? Wrede was both badly defeated and badly wounded at Hanau. He had thought that Napoleon was taking a more northern route than through Hanau. He was rounding up stragglers and partisans under Orlov-Denison only reported that Napoleon had 18,000 men (Wrede had 43,500) and Wrede was convinced that he was actually facing only a "detached corps.' Then Napoleon did show up with his Guard and 30,000 men.

Wrede's 'achievement' was to allow the French to leave Germany after winning yet another engagement.

'Poor Wrede-I made him a count, I could never make him a general.'

-Napoleon after Hanau.

here we see the poor wretches of 1813 – in the perfect retreat and immaculate dress

and

brech -please do me a favour – ignore my postings – I won't engage in a useless tit for tat – as others do, like Napoleon I cannot waste my precious time.

"All this is by-the-by mind – what about the broken squares?! The narratives I have read appear to give a decisive victory to Napoleon and the French; I am very curious therefore as to when these squares were overthrown by this Bavarian cavalry."

I could not find any information about broken squares of French – neither of Bavarians (by cavalry), I encountered only one eye witness report where a French square was caught in the retreat and did surrender, directly in Hanau.

brech -please do me a favour – ignore my postings

I do try to ignore you ad hominem comments which have no place here.

However, you post too many mistakes and misrepresentations that should be addressed. My replies are not for you or any other individual, but for the forum as a whole.

If you don't like it that's just too bad. I really cannot express to you how much I just don't care about what you do or don't do. However, when you misrepresent history, that needs to be answered factually.

Bretchel198

I think it is hilarious that von Winterfeldt's has requested you ignore his postings. I guess he only appreciates those who don't disagree with whatever he posts. But he does come over as a bit of a Wrede fan.

And talking of Wrede and him losing the battle badly, that certainly seems to be the case: 'There is not much to be said about the battle of Hanau. The position taken up by Wrede was hopelessly bad, and he suffered the penalty of taking it.' (page 388, Napoleon's Last Campaign in Germany 1813, F.Loraine Petre)

And Petre, on the same page, also mentions small detachments and stragglers being captured during the period 28th-31st October, but that the French lost less men during the actual battle.

I also noted that Whirlwind thinks you are aggressive for questioning something said in a post? I was totally unaware that disagreeing with someone, questioning something said or requesting sources was an act of aggression? I thought this was the Napoleonic Discussion Board where people, well, you know, discussed things, which as far as I am aware, involved people offering different viewpoints and sources and then, well, discussing it? LOL

So, another Napoleonic thread degenerates into a slanging match…

and Deadhead confuses everyone by confidently recalling that Drouot was a Marshal. I thought he was made one after the Second Restoration years later…….."You are the cannon, Drouot" (Steiger R 1970)

That conviction now joins the "French Light Infantry did not have drummers" and "every country's trumpeters rode greys" ones.

Where did von W's marvellous cartoon of 1813 come from?

@vonW

I could not find any information about broken squares of French – neither of Bavarians (by cavalry), I encountered only one eye witness report where a French square was caught in the retreat and did surrender, directly in Hanau.

Great, thanks for looking. Do you know who they surrendered to, or any of the circumstance surrounding the incident?

Deadhead for president!

@Whirlwind

I will check on that

Gentleman please look at a map and that will tell you what Wrede was trying to do. Also where were the pursuing Allies?

Hanau never stacked up in the accounts.
Stephen

Blucher was to the northeast of Fulda. Bernadotte was out of play and was travelling northeast from Mulhausen. Schwarzenberg was on either side of Muningen which is east of Fulda. This was on 30 October before the shooting started at Hanau. None of the three armies were in supporting distance of Wrede-he was on his own.

So, perhaps you can explain your point here?

The bottom line is that Wrede bit off more than he could chew and digest and paid the price for it. In short, he accomplished nothing but getting badly beaten.

janner

A little bit of banter does not hurt anyone. Apart from that, it looks everyone is still debating the topic to me, which is nice to see. Perhaps you could try joining in rather than masking negative comments? I'm sure you must have a viewpoint on the topic?

@Whirlwind

source :

Historische Beiträge zur Geschichte der Schlacht bei Hanau am 30. und 31. Oktober 1813

in Mittheilungen des Hanauer Bezriksvereins für hessische Geschichte und Landeskunde.

Hanau 1863

Here my summery, for full please consult the above source.

an eye witness of page 44, 31st of October, a detachment of French infantry was still in Hanau, at about later than 3 o'clock – when Austrian Hungarian columns assaulted successfully, the mounted French officer realized that he was cut off from the bridge over the Kinzig and formed a square at the "Paradeplatz" (parade place) – when under fire from Austrian Jäger he realized that his position was hopeless and he surrendered.

There is an excellent account of Hanau in Lefebvre de Behaine's Napoleon et Les Allies Sur le Rhin, 382-389, which goes into some detail on Drouot's 48-gun battery, its attack and defense, along with the employment of the Old Guard infantry which attacked and drove their enemies into the Kinzig River.

What is noteworthy is the employment of the Old Guard Chasseurs as light infantry in open order when they attacked.

I've had a copy for a few years now, but you can find the volume on google books:

link

von Winterfeldt

Be a bit more helpful if you could name 'an eye witness' And if you can, who was the French officer and which unit?

@vonW,

Thanks for that

A little bit of banter does not hurt anyone. Apart from that, it looks everyone is still debating the topic to me, which is nice to see. Perhaps you could try joining in rather than masking negative comments? I'm sure you must have a viewpoint on the topic?

I don't feel that I have enough of a grasp of the primary sources and subsequant research to contribute in a meaningful way, but I was enjoying the exchange of perspectives. So, I'm delighted things are now back on an even keel

janner

Yes, I guess it is best not to comment or join in if one does not know anything (or enough) or had not spotted something concerning the topic.

Talking of which, it is just a shame VW has not responded to my suggestion that he share the name of the officer and regiment he mentioned in his post, if he actually knows them. I'm sure he would not just offer something that someone unknown belonging to an unknown regiment was supposed to have said or written. That would be very silly, don't you agree?

Hopefully VW will be along shortly …

Janner

Yeah…hopefully

It may be that VW has stiffled you and is quite unaware of your request for that source, Gazzola. After all, not everyone shares your regard for 'a little bit of banter'

Anyway, wishing you all a pleasant week ahead.

indeed gaz and brech are on my stifle list, I listed my sources anyway, gaz can read them and download them.

janner

Yes, VW claims he has me on stifle but oddly always seems aware of what I am posting. So, either he does not really have me on stifle (as if I cared anyway), or there is a spy in the camp supplying him with what I post? LOL

And since he always seems aware of what I have posted and in this case requested, why did he not offer an answer? Has he not realised that I may not be the only one wanting know the name of the so called eyewitness and his regiment? To be honest, I've heard some feeble excuses not to support a post in my time, but VW's is one of the weakest and comical yet.

As per his recent post, VW did list his source. It was easy enough to find on google books, link
I hope that helps move things along

The problem is the author of Napoleonistyka messed two battles together, he mistook Prussian cavalry for Bavarian cavalry.
1813.05.26
The Battle of Haynau

…. was proved by Colonel Dolfs, shortly afterwards, at Haynau, where, at the head of 20 squadrons of Prussian cavalry, he attacked General Maison's division, formed in 8 squares and protected by 18 guns, and in less than 15 minutes swept over them, killing, wounding, or making prisoners the whole force and capturing their guns.

Nolan, Cavalry Its History and Tactics, 1860, p. 55

Now that makes much more sense.
Stephen

another good source :

Heilmann : Feldzug von 1813, München 1857

available on google books as well for download.

The strength of Wredes force is estimated to be about 30,000 to 40,000 – that of Napoléon of about 80,000

Now – how could Wrede hope to destroy Napoleon with such inferior numbers?

He inflicted however heavy casualties, the Austrian / Hungarian Army had about 10,000 compared to 20,000 of the Grande Armée.

janner

Still no name or regiment from VW I see, as expected.

But there are certainly some problems with VW's source. Firstly, the link only gives a few very small extracts. Secondly, and more importantly, it appears Roeder's Past Contributions to the History of the Battle of Hanau, published 1863, is only 54 pages long? That is because it appears to be Part 3 of a regional history study, rather than a military study. If so, surely this could not be considered as an appropriate source for a debate? If anything, it appears to be a brief overview and I am surprised VW has offered it. No wonder he could not name the officer or regiment.