Brechtel198 | 13 Oct 2017 2:06 p.m. PST |
As with France, Naples had no Marines. They were sailors, as were the Imperial Guard battalion of sailors. Marin translates as sailor, not Marine, as in the Bataillon de Marins de la Garde. Too many times the French word 'marin' is directly, and mistakenly, translated as Marine. |
Art | 13 Oct 2017 3:45 p.m. PST |
L'intermède révolutionnaire est marqué en 1792 par la séparation définitive entre les troupes de marine reconstituées et les équipages des vaisseaux. Plus Tard…en 1967, est créée, au sein de l'Armée de terre, l'arme des troupes de marine par la fusion de l'infanterie et de l'artillerie coloniale. Sa mission est de mettre en place rapidement des moyens de défense et d'intervention dans des territoires géographiquement éloignés de la métropole et d'assurer une présence continue des forces françaises dans la France d'outre-mer ainsi que dans certains pays alliés. |
Le Breton | 14 Oct 2017 1:06 a.m. PST |
@Sebaar generale di brigata Angelo d'Ambrosio (Reggio 1774 – Napoli 1822) link reggimento d'élite napoletano 12.01.1813 : (3)(37/~1500) stato-maggiore colonnello Francesco Macdonald (7° reg., married in 1830 the ex-queen Caroline Bonaparte Murat, Pescara 1777 – Firenze 1837) link capo battaglione facendo funzione di maggiore Giovanni Arena (7° reg.) capitano facendo funzione di capo battaglione Guarasci capitano facendo funzione di capo battaglione Delpò capitano facendo funzione di capo battaglione Collin aiutante maggiore Oberteuffer (6° reg.) aiutante maggiore Guyard (7° reg.) chirurgo maggiore Gaimary (7° reg.) 1° battaglione v/5° capitano Felice Carlo Cirillo v/5° capitano [vacante], tenente Giuseppe Serrao g/5° capitano [vacante], tenente Enrico Licastro g/5° capitano Domenico Porri 2° battaglione v/6° capitano Cesare Palladini v/6° capitano Giuseppe Affré g/6° capitano Giuseppe Sebastiani g/6° capitano Anatole Dugois 3° battaglione v/7° capitano [vacante], tenente Marquet v/7° capitano [vacante], tenente Desplan g/7° capitano Joseph Letellier g/7° capitano Prospère Schenebely compagnia di marinai della guardia reale capitano di fregata Francesco Capecelatro duca di Castelpagano (1784-1863) 12.01.1813 : (-)(3/82) compagnia di artiglieria a cavallo della guardia reale capitano Pilon 12.01.1813 : (4 x cannone da 4 libbre, 2 x obice da 6 pollici)(5/77) The brigade was collected at Elbing in the first days of January, with the artillery and the sailors at Dirschau, as part of Gérard's division. They covered the French retreat to the Elbe, engaged continually with Cossacks 16 January – 1 February. At the end of January, the Neapolitans were reinfocred by French troops. Nafziger gives the folowing: French Corps d'Observation under Eugéne 1st Division: Général de division Gérard 3/3rd Line Infantry Regiment (11/416) 3/105th Line Infantry Regiment (15/530) 3/127th Line Infantry Regiment (12/520) (ex- gardes de Hambourg et de Lubeck) 1/,2/Neapolitan Elites (12 cos)(35/1,326) (detached from 5th, 6th & 7th Neapolitan Regts) Neapolitan Guard Marines (1 co)(3/116) Neapolitan Guard Artillery (6/58) Neapolitan Guard Train (0/29) Neapolitan Guard Ambulance Service (4/2) Artillery and Train (7 6pdrs & 1 howitzer)(2/107) The general d'Amborsio left to retrieve new forces from Naples. With him also went about 300 sick men of color of the 7° Reg deemed unlikley to recover in winter in the north. 300 more men were sent to a hospital on the Weser. On 13 March, the reggimento d'élite mustered 34 officers and 869 other ranks present under arms in 2 battalions, the sailors mustering 3 officers and 82 other ranks. Their new brigade commander was général de brigade Philibert Fressinet (Marcigny 1767 – Paris 1821). See link The 3 French battalions musted 860 present under arms. Gérard's division now was part of Davout's corps, and the Neopolitan artillery company was assigned to the corps reserve. Well …. it goes on from there on. The details are mostly here : PDF link |
Brechtel198 | 14 Oct 2017 4:27 a.m. PST |
Neapolitan Guard troops even as late as 1813 were mostly French and Germans, not Neapolitans. The Neapolitan Guard 'Marines' were not Marines but sailors, as they were in the French Imperial Guard. Neither the French nor the Neapolitans had Marines. The Neapolitans in the Danzig garrison had no choice but to serve well. First, they were besieged, and second, Rapp didn't put up with any nonsense. Rapp's memoirs have an excellent section on the siege itself. |
Edwulf | 14 Oct 2017 5:24 a.m. PST |
The Neapolitans were quite clearly poor troops. So it is right to reflect this as a national trait. Of course they are not bad troops because of a genetic disposition to being poor soldiers but due to social, cultural, economic conditions at the time that were definitely detrimental to their service. They did win a few battles in the 1790s. But their record in the 1800s is not good. Even if they rolled 6s on a few occasions, they still had issues. Not showing these sucks some of the period flavour from the game? |
Le Breton | 14 Oct 2017 7:05 a.m. PST |
"Neapolitan Guard troops even as late as 1813 were mostly French and Germans, not Neapolitans." No, you are wrong. 1/3 of guard infantry battalions were "French", the remainder local 1/3 of guard cavalry squadrons were "German", the remainder local all other the other guard units were local "French" or "German" might be better expressed as non-native : they appear to have had a quite a mix of men of different countries. Guardia Reale Napoletana – 1813 reggimento granatieri – 2 battaglioni (francesi) 1º reggimento veliti a piedi – 2 battaglioni (ex- reggimento veliti cacciatori) 2º reggimento veliti a piedi – 2 battaglioni (ex- reggimento veliti cacciatori) reggimento cavalleggeri o lancieri – 4 squadroni (ex- lancieri di Berg) reggimento ussari – 4 squadroni (fino al aprile : reggimento veliti a cavallo) reggimento guardie del corpo del Re – 2 squadroni (fino al marzo : 1º e 2º squadrone del reggimento guardie d'onore del Re) reggimento corazzieri – 2 squadroni (fino al marzo : 3º e 4º squadrone del reggimento guardie d'onore del Re e compagnia carabinieri scelti) compagnia di artiglieria a cavallo compagnia di treno di artiglieria battaglione marinai battaglione veterani compagnia di alabardieri reali di Napoli |
Art | 14 Oct 2017 10:21 a.m. PST |
Bonjour Monsieur Le Breton While the origins of an Officers name is sometimes hard to determine…or from what country he may come from…I still think that Martinien from pages 714 to 721 validates your postings… You shall even find a sprinkling of Napolitain Officers in the other Tableaux des Officieres tues et blesses…such as in L'ÉTAT-MAJOR GÉNÉRAL…SERVICE D'ÉTAT-MAJOR…Aides de camp…D'ÉTAT-MAJOR GÉNÉRAL (division)…Généraux de brigade…ect… Best Regards Art |
Le Breton | 15 Oct 2017 5:15 a.m. PST |
Yes, Art …. those look like local officers mostly to me. And some of the "foreign" names, like the colonel Francesco Macdonald, were actually born and raised in the kingdom of Naples. They seem to be mostly 2nd or 3rd generation offspring of "mercenary" officers who served in the era 1735-1770, when the Neapolitan army included more such "foreign" formations. Compared to other smaller nations, such as the minor German-speaking states, I am really not seeing anything particularly "foreign" or "mercenary" about the army of Naples under Ferdinand or Murat. Naples did have two foreign guard units under Joseph and Murat (the infantry grenadiers and cavalry light horse lancers). As usurpers of the local monarchy, it is not too surprising. So, Brechtel was wrong about these being "most" of the Naples guard. And they do not seem to have ever seen combat outside of the Naples area (including the Capri expedition). And the French guard also had a few "foreign" units : Polish and Dutch light horse / lancers, Dutch grenadiers, Lithuanians, Mameluks, etc. And various "insertions" of foreign sub-units such as Corsicans from Elba. And foreign attachedt units such as the Vistula Legion in 1812, the vélites de Turin and vélites de Florence, etc. Outside the guard, we have one ligne regiment of "Africans" (out of 8) and one light regiment of "Corsicans" (out of 4). Only the Africans were sent on campaign outside of the Naples area. So again, not foreigners "mostly" or "relied upon". For better or worse, the Neapolitan army under Ferdinand, Joseph and Murat was indeed essentially Neapolitan. And I am still awaiting examples of particularly bad behavior of this army during 1807-1814, other than by the few units (mistakenly) filled out with civic prisoners by Joseph in late 1807/early 1808. And I am still waiting with eager anticipation to see what a regimental "service record" for a French allied unit looked like. Brechtel said that this existed, and one of the Neapolitan units had the "notation" of being nusiances. I am utterly fascinated to see what this document was. I really hope it existed, and was not some fantasy of Brechtel's or of one of this secondary sources. I bet you also did not know about these "service records" for regiments, with "notations" about the performance or skill. Inspection results/reports of course yes, but "service records"? How wonderful! Unless it is just something Brechtel invented. |
Sebaar | 15 Oct 2017 6:39 a.m. PST |
About calvary: These new regiments were intended to be light horse lancers modelled on the Polish lancer regiments of the French Army. Despite problems with the recruitment of quality troopers and the supply of re-mounts, the Neapolitan cavalry acquitted themselves well in the field, Napoleon personally presenting eight Legione d'Honneur to officers of the 2o Reggimento cavalleggeri. from The Army of Naples 1806-1814 by Rawkins |
Glenn Pearce | 15 Oct 2017 5:21 p.m. PST |
Hello Sebaar! I'm sure that you have noticed that a number of responders have stated that the Neapolitans were bad troops and yet offer very little evidence to support it. Yes indeed there do seem to have been a couple of units that were of poor quality, but certainly not an entire army over a period of some 25 years. Sadly some wargame rules published in the 60's-80's and even later contained what are called "national characteristics". These rules rated every country on a scale. The British and French were usually at the top of the scale and the Neapolitans were generally at the bottom, just below the Spanish and Portuguese. The scale was accepted by most of the wargaming community at the time and became imbedded as factual to a multitude of players. In the case of the Neapolitans there were also a few famous negative statements that were circulated as historical. A couple have been mentioned here. For those lacking any further outside knowledge this was just confirmation that the scale was correct. Towards the turn of the century and onwards a number of new wargame rules have walked away from the "national characteristic" rules entirely. These new writers think the entire concept was poorly conceived, badly researched and bears no real resemblance to history. An army is pretty much change in motion with a vast number of moving parts. The army formed one day will be completely different 25 years later. So to say that an army was composed of all bad troops over that period of time without offering a detailed analysis is ridiculous. My own very limited research indicates that Ferdinand's army pre 1806 was not much different than any other army that was beaten by the French. So to label them as "all bad", lacks any creditable evidence that I could locate. When Ferdinand departed it seems that a number of loyal troops went with him and others just left the service. In 1806 when Joseph is called upon to raise an army there really isn't much left to draw on. In desperation a number of unsatisfactory candidates were drafted and some of these would go on to become famous for their poor behaviour. Still I find no evidence to confirm the entire army acted below standard. It seems that the few have been selected by some to represent the entire army. I suspect that bad research is more the culprit here than bad units. When Murat takes the field with his army in 1815 they seem to do just fine until Murat orders a withdrawal at Tolentino. They are not the first army to fall apart when ordered to withdraw. You could call them brittle perhaps, as "bad troops" seems extreme, and a total disregard for the circumstances. My conclusion as stated before that without any solid research to the contrary most of these troops should be considered at least average, with the exception of the few who actually have a bad reputation, and of course those who are better should also be noted as such. Best regards, Glenn |
basileus66 | 15 Oct 2017 9:41 p.m. PST |
There are three basic elements that define how an army will behave in battle: the quality of its officers and NCOs; recruitment of the rank and file; and supplies. In order to understand how and why the Neapolitan regiments behave, we need to know who were their officers and NCOs, which was their experience, which was the rate to rank and file, and how well motivated they were. Then, we will need to know how was the army recruited, from where came the soldiers: were they peasants forcibly recruited? or included a significant proportion of urban proletarians, artisans out of work, beggars, ecc? did receive a bounty? how many were volunteers? Finally, we will need to know how well supplied they were. Can't say in other countries, but in Spain the Imperial armies found difficult to obtain supplies. French units and those in active armies, ie. not those assigned to garrisons, were prioritized. Did the Neapolitan soldiers feel ignored by their French commanding officers? Spanish patriot propaganda targeted especifically the Italian and German contingents in the French armies in Spain, with leaflets calling to desert written in Italian, German and Latin -it was hoped that the Polish soldiers, as Catholics, would understand Latin. It offered a prize for desertion and the possibility either to enlist in the Spanish army -which oddly enough was chosen by the deserters in more than one occasion- or free passage out of Spain. There is a notice of a full Italian company deserting, together with their officers and NCOs, who actually were the leaders of the mass desertion. Regretfully, the document only says they were "Italian", without specifying if they came from a Neapolitan unit or a Northern Italian regiment. |
ITALWARS | 16 Oct 2017 6:29 a.m. PST |
I imagine Neapolitan troops of Imperial Armies reflected fully national characteristic…so totally unreliable, almost coward soldiers..unwilling to discipline and sense of duty if not honour…even in 1860 , for example, the Neapolitan troops defending their lands vs the modest, untrained, badly led and ill equipped Garibaldini routed at first contact ..even the Guard units…with the exception on units formed by Swiss (cacciatori) or bavarian mercenaires….the well mounted and well equipped cavalry was even worst…during Colonial wars, as for example ad Adwa in 1896, the worst troops were those formed by Southeners (with the exception of the Sicilian artillerymen) above all the suppoed to be iconic Bersaglieri (a lot of Neapolitans among them) which , if your read true memories from veterans, give up the fight at first danger to be rushed by Abbyssinians , routing and even thretaning at gun point their officers…i heard same tales referring to Bersaglieri (many if not all Neapolitans) during peace enforcing mission in 1982 in Lebanon..they refused to go patrolling in Beirut and did'nt accepteed to live bunkers during firefights even threatning their officers…i suppose the Neapolitan soldiers of Napoleon were similar. The only accounts of brave Neapolitans fighting well occured during French Revolutionary period in the Two Sicily Kingdom..and later during the Calabrian Revolts..but the fight was carried out by armed peasants and insurgents not by soldiers…maybe the social factor (jacobins and Napoleon supporters were seen as ancestral ennemies) was the real cause |
Brechtel198 | 16 Oct 2017 7:53 a.m. PST |
I've ordered the new book coming out on the Neapolitans under Murat by Digby Smith. It's being published next year. Found a quote in Philip Haythornewaite's book Uniforms of Napoleon's Russian Campaign on the Neapolitans. It's from page 120: 'The Neapolitan units were one of the 'Grande Armee's' weakest links, as recognized by Napoleon in a letter to his brother Joseph (then King of Naples) in 1807, refusing to let them carry 'Eagles', because 'you must be aware that…these troops are no better than none at all…' The general standard can be gathered from the fact that when the 'Pioniers Noirs (raised in 1803 from negroes and mulattoes from Santo Domingo) were in French service they were regarded as the worst unit in the army; when transferred to Neapolitan service in August 1806, under the title of 'Royal African Regiment' (7th Line), they were superior to any existing unit of the Neapolitan forces! In 1812 the Neapolitans had one of the highest desertion-rates in the 'Grande Armee.' |
4th Cuirassier | 16 Oct 2017 8:06 a.m. PST |
@ Glenn You can believe all that if you want to, but it's profoundly unhistorical. Happy gaming. |
basileus66 | 16 Oct 2017 10:05 a.m. PST |
Italwars Neapolitan tercios were considered only second to Spanish tercios, in XVIth and early XVIIth Centuries by their Habsburgs masters. There was nothing wrong in Neapolitans per se. It took years of neglect, bad government and shameful explotation of peasantry to transform them into indifferent soldiers. Are you surprised that in 1860 they weren't to die for a king that was just a tyrant with a crown? What would have been surprising is that they would! |
Brechtel198 | 16 Oct 2017 10:28 a.m. PST |
You also have to take into account the 'tradition' of chronic banditry and other illegal activities in the Neapolitan back country. |
Brechtel198 | 16 Oct 2017 10:57 a.m. PST |
I bet you also did not know about these "service records" for regiments, with "notations" about the performance or skill. Inspection results/reports of course yes, but "service records"? How wonderful! Unless it is just something Brechtel invented. Once again you post an ad hominem comment where none has been directed against any of your postings. It should be withdrawn and apologized for. Do you not know or understand what a service record is? It can be a regimental history, a listing of what a person or a unit has done in their service and can be written or not. Once again, I am asking you to refrain from making ad hominem comments which are uncalled for and do nothing but cheapen the discourse. |
Glenn Pearce | 16 Oct 2017 11:07 a.m. PST |
Thanks 4th, but without any proof your comments ring hollow. Except of course that I can believe what I want too. |
Glenn Pearce | 16 Oct 2017 11:20 a.m. PST |
Hello Brechtel198! I think most people will agree that the 1806 army had some poor units in it. Since a very large part of the 1812 army just disintegrated I would think that you would have to rate the Neapolitans as average for that army. Best regards, Glenn |
Prince of Essling | 16 Oct 2017 1:11 p.m. PST |
Interesting article in Italian by Virgilio Ilari and Piero Crociani – Five Neapolitan Regiments in Peninsular War 1808-1813. PDF link It is a history of the approximately 9,400 Neapolitan troops sent to the Spain during the Peninsular War (1st and 2nd Line, 1st light, 1st and 2nd chasseurs. It shows some 3,000 deserted, 1,000 were taken prisoner (600 in combat and the remainder at Figueras), 1,800 died (combat and in hospital) – however of the 5,103 sent in 1810 some 1,209 either remained ?in Naples) or deserted. |
Art | 16 Oct 2017 1:37 p.m. PST |
…and what of 1813 to 1814…? Seems to me that the French had nothing to say against the 8e Régiment et 4e Régiment Formé en 1812 It was only after Murat deserted that the 8e Régiment was forced to disband…en plus..le 81e Régiment et la 8e Régiment…ils ont combattu ensemble comme une vrai brigade… Et..le RÉGIMENT D'ÉLITE…Formé à Dantzig des compagnies de grenadiers et de voltigeurs des 5e , 6e et 7e régiments Et La 2e Régiment CHASSEURS A CHEVAL 26 août 1813, dans le bataille de Dresde… Best Regards Art |
Le Breton | 16 Oct 2017 11:14 p.m. PST |
@Brechtel It is not ad hominen to ask you for the sources for what you have posted. If you have none, that is fine also. If they are your personal secret and you do not want to share them, that is fine too. But there is *nothing* wrong with asking you about them. 1. You posted : "The 2d Line Infantry Regiment …. in Spain from 1808 …. was sent home in 1811, the notation to their service record being that they had become 'nuisances.'" 2. I asked : "Source, please? I have never heard of "service records" for French or French-allied infantry regiments wherein such a "notation" might be found. Please, please tell us where this gem comes from." 3. You answered : "[a service record] can be a regimental history, a listing of what a person or a unit has done in their service and can be written or not." Thank you for providing a definition. We can suppose that since we have here a "notation", that the "service record" in this case was written. So, what is the source for your first comment, if there is one? To exactly which "service record" were you referring? |
Brechtel198 | 17 Oct 2017 2:44 a.m. PST |
No, it isn't incorrect to ask a question. The point is how to ask a question. Just asking a straight forward question is easy. Asking in a condescending and pejorative manner is something else again. You've made at least ten ad hominem comments to or about me in at least three different threads. And once again I'm asking you to stop. |
Le Breton | 17 Oct 2017 4:12 a.m. PST |
Does that mean that we are not going to obtain from you any comments or information about the source(s) for your comment : "The 2d Line Infantry Regiment …. in Spain from 1808 …. was sent home in 1811, the notation to their service record being that they had become 'nuisances.'"? I get the impression, and please show me wrong, that if one questions your posts, that one is accused of having "a condescending and pejorative manner" and from that are then are accused of "ad hominem comments to or about" you. This is not about you. It is about something you posted. I am not making any comment about you. I am asking about the source support for your post. Claiming you're a victim of some sort of ad hominem attack seems like you are making a smoke screen to cover up pontificating here *as if* you had valid source support when in fact you do not. It is only a supposition, not an accusation. You have every opportunity to show that the supposition is incorrect. Can you, after all, provide one or more source(s) for your comment and "service record" and "notation" and "nnuisances"? Or conversely, do you have no such source support and your comments reflect only your personal opinion – an opinion which is of course your right to have and to share here. Is this "service record" something of your own creation, and are the "notations" therein made only by you? It is a *very* simple question. Why is the answer so very difficult for you? |
von Winterfeldt | 17 Oct 2017 4:32 a.m. PST |
it is in elting – and seemingly brechtel has immense difficulties with quoting – here what I could find : "General Louis Chabot reported that the 2d Regiment of Line Infantry did well in 1808 – 1809, though it had to be constantly watched to prevent desertion. But in 1811 Suchet asked that all Neapolitans be sent home as worthless nuissances." p. 397 Eling, John : Sowrds Around a Throne, Da Capo Press, New York, 1997 Now my question – is this true or all made up by Elting? |
ITALWARS | 17 Oct 2017 5:10 a.m. PST |
Basilieu talwars "Neapolitan tercios were considered only second to Spanish tercios, in XVIth and early XVIIth Centuries by their Habsburgs masters. There was nothing wrong in Neapolitans per se. It took years of neglect, bad government and shameful explotation of peasantry to transform them into indifferent soldiers. Are you surprised that in 1860 they weren't to die for a king that was just a tyrant with a crown?" That's totally untrue..no Tyran at all in the Bourbon Kingdom of Naples…the Royal family was loved by the people..opposition came from minoritarian but well organised bourgeoisie ..the so called "liberals" that despised common people and were corrupted and paid (including officers) by British Free Massonry..in order to grab/stole resources of the Kingdom..ai it happened..military attitude is another thing…Neaolitans have no idea of sense of duty …still today Naples is the dove of every kind of mafias and corruption…alos if one of the most beatufil cities in the World is extremely risky for a tourist even to stop having a coffee in the centre of the city…how can you imagine that those people…or at least many of them could fight if the had the opportunity to avoid any risk by deserting..
|
ITALWARS | 17 Oct 2017 5:14 a.m. PST |
try to read memories from Allied WW2 veterans about their experience in occupied Naples after Salerno landing ..including Raleigh Trevelyan..to understand what Naples was ..and still is |
ITALWARS | 17 Oct 2017 5:20 a.m. PST |
@Brechtel "You also have to take into account the 'tradition' of chronic banditry and other illegal activities in the Neapolitan back country." In reality those so called "bandits" ..or many of them ..acted as real patriots far more motivated and heroic than egular troops…above all Vs the French, the Cisalpine Italians and then Vs Garibaldini/Piedmontese invasors…the second conquest of Naples and the following guerilla warfare with bandit insurgents supported, in some occasions, by royal Navy was, from some memories i read, for the French worst and most bloody of the Spanish Guerilla experience |
Le Breton | 17 Oct 2017 8:48 a.m. PST |
@Von WInterfeldt. Well, that is not a "service record" with a "notation", which Brechtel said he had. We shoudl give him every opportunty to supply the source for his post, or admit that he just created it from his own opinions. From the artcile by Ilari and Crociani linked above: At their action at San Cliemente, the Neapolitan 2nd Line executed a bayonet charge on the Spanish right, taking 2 canons and a howitzer. Chabran, their divisional commander, wrote in his report that the 2nd Line was "determined to be victors", their maneuver, executed "with order and precision", and which conferred "the greastest honor on the II regiment", was resolute, and "the Spanish, seeing that they were being turned, thought of nothing except how to effect their retreat, and the other French divisions were occupied only in pursuing them". After a successful action in February 1809 he writes : "Until now the II Neapolitan regiment has always fought alone. They again proved that they were worthy of combat in line with the best troops and they confirmed the high opinion that they have already in the army for their valor." |
Le Breton | 17 Oct 2017 10:02 a.m. PST |
I can't find anything like "nuisances" in Suchet's memoires. Maybe this refers to some report about reorganizing the Neapolitan infantry in 1811. They had entered Spain with 3 regimental commands (1st and 2nd Line, 1st light) and six battalions. By mid 1811 they were down to less than 800 present under arms. Administration of 3 regiments and 6 battalions for so few might have been a "nuisance". These were reorganized in mid-1811 into a single regiment (the 8th Line) of 2 battalions, under colonel Guglielmo Pepe from February 1812. Suchet reviewed the 8th Ligne in July at Valencia. Suchet wrote that he "was pleased to see that these [Neapolitan] troops had gained, in several respects, particularly with regard to the well-being of the soldiers. Colonel Pepe, since his arrival, has succeeded in establishing order, unknown before him, in the accounts of the regiment, in regulating the livrets and the account records of the soldiers, in securing for them the effects which they require and to which they have the right. The Marshal hopes that the surveillance and perseverance of their chief will also improve the deportment and training of a regiment which for its courage has deserved a part of the successes of the Army of Aragon." Anyway, Colonel Elting gives no source or context for his comment about "nuisances". But Brechtel wrote that there are "service records" with such "notation". Reading the detailed article linked above, the main source of Neapolitan desertion seems to have been the convoys of new untrained recruits, not the units with the army. The infantry commanders wrote that replacements should be sent only in trained battalions unders competent NCO's, not as raw recruits. The light horse regiment asked that recruits not be sent and, if they must be sent, that they arrive separately from their horses, so that deserters could not take needed remounts with them. It is a rather interesting story, with many details. I never knew much of anything about the Neapolitans until this thread was started. |
ITALWARS | 17 Oct 2017 10:32 a.m. PST |
From what I realized in other books from same authors Ilari and Crociani used only very second hand celebrative sources among them a useless book by a boring fascist general Ambrogio Bollati..cross reference with foreign sources are neglected at best andI know one of the authors …very amatorial historian and I suppose he not even know were are Archives Nationaux |
Brechtel198 | 18 Oct 2017 1:51 p.m. PST |
This is not about you. Absolutely correct. What it is about is your continued insistence on posting ad hominem comments, such as the following: ‘don't thank Brechtel too much – much of what he posts is wrong or incomplete. He appears very biased, completely unfamiliar with non-French/Engliah sources and over-reliant on modern secondary sources.'‘It seems that for some *years* Mr.Brechtel has not liked to respond when his assertions are questioned, nor does questioning them have any impact on the positive and sure tone with which he informs us of what "should be noted".' ‘For John Milller : I will say what I said to Osage, don't thank Mr. Brechtel too much – much of what he posts is wrong or incomplete. He appears very biased, completely unfamiliar with non-French/English sources and over-reliant on modern secondary sources.' If these guys were French, we would be treated to many "It should be noted …." instructions about how elite, trained, experienced, etc, etc. they were. So when someone, on another thread, was crowing about the veteran status and excellent individual records of the French old guards…' Or, as usual, are we going to be treated to more of Brechtel's personal opinions, ideas, conjectures and quotes from modern secondary csources? That is out of context, of at best uncertain provenance, and not well translated – which one might term …. "a Brechtel trifecta !" I bet you also did not know about these "service records" for regiments, with "notations" about the performance or skill. Inspection results/reports of course yes, but "service records"? How wonderful! Unless it is just something Brechtel invented. So, other than you, who ever used the term "Death Ride" ? I've asked you to stop with personal, ad hominem comments such as those above at least three times. This isn't a school yard, it is a Napoleonic forum and there are rules against personal attacks such as the ones above that you have posted. |
Le Breton | 18 Oct 2017 2:04 p.m. PST |
You do not make the rules. As far as I can tell, I have written about your posts and your comments, not about you. If you have a complaint, make it to the management of the forum, and stop talking about how hurt are your feelings. I think you will get little sympathy when you act all hurt and upset whenever someone questions you posts or their grounding in contemporary sources. I see you are not going to provide a source support for the items I have questioned. We can suppose that there is no "service record: with a "notation" about the 2nd Neapolitian Line being "nusiances". Can we suppose that you just invented this ? |
Brechtel198 | 18 Oct 2017 2:08 p.m. PST |
You have missed the point entirely. Making personal attacks on this, or any other forum, is beyond the Pale and you make a habit of it. Again, I'm asking you to stop. Stay on point and don't get personal. |
Le Breton | 18 Oct 2017 2:08 p.m. PST |
What is the world is personally insulting or hurtful to you about asking, after noting that I could not find the term elsewhere, "So, other than you, who ever used the term "Death Ride" ???? Your response was that an author in 1996 used a similar phrase "charge of death", and that you thought there was prior usage that you could not recall. OK, question asked and answered. Topic closed. How could your feelings possibly be hurt by such an exchange? Is the mere asking a question of you about what you post so threatening? I can't believe this is so. |
basileus66 | 18 Oct 2017 9:53 p.m. PST |
how can you imagine that those people…or at least many of them could fight if the had the opportunity to avoid any risk by deserting Given the opportunity of deserting, many soldiers in the Napoleonic era did take it. It wasn't a particular treat of Neapolitan troops. Foreign regiments in Spain were riddled by desertion. Some German regiments suffered so many desertions that the Spanish Army was able to recruit them in whole units. Soldiers deserted for many reasons, and not necessarily for an adversion to fight. |
Brechtel198 | 19 Oct 2017 2:56 a.m. PST |
Perhaps perusing the combat record of the Neapolitan troops from 1792-1815 might be helpful. What did they actually accomplish, especially under Joseph's rule and then Murat's? |
Sebaar | 28 Mar 2018 1:59 p.m. PST |
"I participated in a prejudice of little esteem of the Neapolitan troops: they filled me with wonder at Lutzen, Bautzen, Gdansk and Hanau. The famous Samnites, their ancestors, would not have fought with greater value. Courage is like love, it needs food. » ( Napoleon Bonaparte commencing from the Italian troops, Mainz November 1813 ) Also according to google translation of this document: PDF link Both Neapolitan infantry and calvary have some solid battle record. |
Digby Green | 28 Mar 2018 4:42 p.m. PST |
Many years ago I painted up a 25mm regiment of Neopolitans it was an african regiment. They looked really good in their white uniforms and dark skin. |
attilathepun47 | 28 Mar 2018 9:16 p.m. PST |
You came rather late to this discussion, but thanks for your contribution. It's very interesting that Napoleon seems to have radically revised his opinion of the Neapolitans. |