"WSS's Best General: Eugene von Savoy or Duke of Marlborough " Topic

I know the answer of the British …. "Eugene???" who was is guy :-) but actually please consider the total history of both General:
Malborough foght and won 4 battles (whose 3 with Eugene) – Blenheim, Ramilles Oudenaarde and Malplaquet – then always with the help of the Prince and then his military career stopped. His enemies were always the same French-Bavarians, with same tactics.
Eugene started at the Siege of Vienna in 1683 (!!) against the Turks; he fought against the Turks, than against the French (won the famous battle of Turin, totally forgotten by the English litarature but has the same importance of Blenheim or Ramilles), then lost battles (Denain) than won again against the Turks winning to the Empire huge territories of Europe and liberating Belgrade. His monuments are in Turin, (with an allee carrying his name exactly in the point where he struck the French), Vienna, Budapest and Belgrad, a very international one.
Then he fought again in the War of Polish succession.

Up to you, please vote; for me Eugene was better
So

Eugene 1
Marlborough 0

link

It's tough because they were such a good combination, and I think that should count for something.

In individual terms though, yes, I'd give the nod to Eugene as well.

Eugene 2
Marlborough 0

How about Villars? He's up there as well IMHO. Might have beat them at Malplaquet if he hadn't been seriously wounded and carried off the field early in the battle.

Nice paper soldiers by the way. Are they home-made or commercial?

Villars, certainly, and James Fitzjames, Duc de Berwick, were both excellent. Spain was a very different story from the lowlands.

I shall put another vote in for the Duke of Berwick, he destroyed the Catalan and Allied forces in Spain

Marlborough, with Berwick (his nephew) and Eugene a hairs breadth behind.

Marlboroughs military career is shorter than Eugene due to in house politics, but they are both right up there with the list of great capatins.

Eugene. If you know his Italian campaigns you realize he is better than Villar.

You also need to bear in mind Marlborough's record in sieges, particularly given the importance that his contemporaries placed on successful sieges. I also suspect that Marlborough would have had a decent chance of decisive victory in the war if he had been given a free hand. For me, Marlborough, followed by Eugene, Villars and Berwick, in that order.

I am currently about half way through reading a book on the Nine Years War. It is a superb book and I am enjoying it immensely. However it is very frustrating because of the lack of battles and how hampered the commanders were due to the supply situation and the lack of coordination between the different armies.

Then you go to the War of the Spanish Succession and you realise the effect that Marlborough had. He did win his four battles but with very diverse armies from different allies with different war aims and against the French Army which was the finest in Europe at the time and who had not lost a battle (or very very few anyway), in the 50 years prior to that war. The battles of Blenheim and Ramillies must have had an enormous impact at the time.

So I think that Marlborough shines as much as a politician/diplomat. Other than Eugene there were no other good generals on the Allied side and definitely nobody else who could have held the coalition armies as well together as he did. In this respect he was like Schwartzenburg in 1813 or Eisenhower in WW2.

I am not sure he deserves to be counted as one of the great generals in history but he certainly counts as one of the great commanders.

I agree with Aussie about the siege importance: the siege and victory of Eugene in Belgrad in 1717 is a total masterpiece both of siege warfare and pitched battles. Besides Eugene was fighting the Turks that had a totally different way of war.
Villars I cannot say. But then the Duke of Vendome?

So at the moment

Eugene 3
Marlborough 3
Duke of Berwick 1
Villars 1

for Duc de Brouilly:
thanks.. I draw and cut by myself so homemade.
If you wish visit my page paperbattles.it

Marlborough was given command of the Confederation army with Prinz Eugene's consent, even though the Austrians provided more troops than the British. Eugene had a lot of respect for John Churchill – and that is all one can say.
Marlborough never took on a siege or battle he did not think he could win, Eugene lost more than once.
They worked well together, liked each other, and would probably laugh at this post, methinks!

Marlborough. As noted above, he lead multinational armies, making things harder. In the main, unlike Eugene and Villiers. Also consider that during the NYW Marlborough carried out two successful amphibious assaults.

Pretty much a draw for me. Eugene's career was longer and more varied while Marlborough was often hamstrung by politics.

Eugene 4
Marlborough 5
Duke of Berwick 1
Villars 1

Hello Broglie

Just wondering which book you are reading.

Regards

Eugene, for me. Just wish more of his life was covered in English. No doubt about it, the two acting together seemed un-stoppable!

Hello AussiAndy

Am reading 'The Nine Years War and the British Army 1688 – 97 -the operations in the Low Countries' by John Childs.

It is not as anglocentric as its title suggests but gives a good broad account of the war. I am not finished the book yet but so far I am enjoying it immensely.

I know very little about this war so it is all new to me. I have however read quite a few books on the War f the Spanish Succession which followed.

I got the book on Amazon.

Regards

I WOULD say Marlborough. But it wouldn't be fair. As the only book on the period I've read have Marlborough in the center. Eugene comes out very well in those books even if he is secondary to Marlborough in the narrative.

So I'm have to say both/none until I'm better informed.

Marlborough for this rabbit. He was the Eisenhower of his time. People mention his four battles…. but on some early career occasions his army was ready and deployed to engage in battle, French army marching across his army front and the Dutch didn't "release him" to crush the French army marching into position. Campaign year 1702 several times this happened. Those action go generally unknown to history as no battle took place except for Marlborough personally writing a letter to his French opponent his regret for not engaging in battle.

Thanks Broglie

I am pretty sure that I have that one in one of my numerous piles of books that I will one day read. I do get to all of them eventually.

Regards

Thanks AussieAndy.

I have been wading through my bookpile lately and thought I was doing well but then more temptations come along and I can't resist. I will never get to the end of the pile this way.

Still it's a good complaint to have.

Regards

Eugene 6
Marlborough 7
Duke of Berwick 1
Villars 1

Marlborough- although not by much. Both were great captains who achieved amazing victories. But Marlborough had much more patience for the politics needed to get the best out of allies who were not fully under his command.

Marlborough was the true master of coalition warfare in an era when- if you were trying seriously to defeat Louis XIV's war machine- leading an effective coalition was everything.

So both great generals, but in terms of the question posed originally- Marlborough certainly.

Marlborough 8
Eugene 6
Duke of Berwick 1
Villars 1

This is a dangerous argument. Vendome stood up well against Eugene in Italy. Villars defeated Eugene at the end of the Spanish Succession. Berwick was holding Eugene off when he was killed in the Polish Succession. Marlborough and Eugene were the best team of their day. If you argue that Eugene was better than Marlborough, you open the door to the argument that there were French commanders who were as good or better than the best of the pair.

Thank Bill… but at the end .. who you prefer?

Marlborough was given command of the Confederation army with Prinz Eugene's consent, even though the Austrians provided more troops than the British. Eugene had a lot of respect for John Churchill – and that is all one can say.

This – in the same way that Wellington regarded Napoleon as the greatest commander "of this, of any, age".

one more for Eugene. For many of Marlborough's victories,he and Eugene shared command.

Marlborough 8
Eugene 7
Duke of Berwick 1
Villars 1

Definitely Eugene, just the Victories of Zenta, Belgrade and Turin put John Churchill in the shadows.
Strategic planning for the WSS was in Eugene's hands.
And what's this for an argument that John Churchill commanded multinational armies? Part of Eugene's army were Prussian and Piedmontese troops (Turin). Just because English-language works write almost exclusively about John Churchill does not mean that he was the better general!

Marlborough 8
Eugene 8
Duke of Berwick 1
Villars 1

ps I agree, Mighty

To be frank it is quite hard to see how Zenta, Belgrade (and lets not forget Peterwardein either to be fair) and Turin, very significant though they were- put Marlborough's victories "in the shadows". I would really like to understand the reasoning behind that statement.
I've also never read anywhere that strategic planning for the WSS was in Eugene's hands- Hindu- do you have a reference for that?

Turin was indeed an impressive victory though it was a smaller encounter against a secondary French army in a secondary theatre of war (measured by the resources the French had allocated to it). The first three were major victories against the Turks who although extremely ferocious fighters who would punish mistakes, could certainly not by this period be considered first class opposition in the way the French army was.

Marlborough's four main field victories (three of which Eugene was present in a major role of course) were all very big battles- always against the main armies of France- the military superpower of the age. This was most definitely first class opposition.

But actually in was at least as much Marlborough's ability to completely dictate the strategic situation in the main theatre of war against this first rate opposition, with strategic surprise and deception masterstrokes such as his march to the Danube in 1704, his breaking the 'impregnable' Ne Plus Ultra defences in 1711 and in particular his capture of the third city of France Lille in 1708, absolutely shocked Europe. Even more than the battles (which we wargamers naturally but excessively focus upon) it was these successes, where he was in sole command, completely upturned the balance of European military power at the time.

If you still think Marlborough stands in the shadows it is worth reading a little more contemporary European (NOT British) material. Start with St Simon who had access to the French military leadership as well as the court- see what they thought of Marlborough.

Eugene

Nothing like a well reasoned argument……

Marlborough 9
Eugene 9
Duke of Berwick 1
Villars 1

please vote!!