"Best British General of the Napoleonic Wars?" Topic

Who would you rate as the best?

Maj. Gen. Henry Procter?

By acclimation, I'm sure.

Hill would be my pick.

Not sure there is any point asking the question…

It has to be Wellington. However, if you ask 'Apart from Wellington etc..? I think I would go with 'Daddy' Hill as well.

1. Wellington
2. Hill
3. Craufurd

A lot of people are fond of Moore, but I tend to think that finding yourself leading epic retreats that pretty much destroy your own army aren't a sign of a good general, even if they end in a "battle honor" like Corunna…

25 star general Duke of Brannigan.

Imho the question should have been "Other then Wellington who was the best British general of the Napoleonic Wars?".

Christopher

Agree. Wellington was a great captain and was the best British general of the period.

After Wellington? I think Picton and Crauford as well as Alexander Dickson for the artillery-excellent artilleryman and commander.

Regarding John Moore, I think he has been underrated. He was given an impossible mission and kept the army intact and got it out which was his only choice.

Moore's contribution of a well-trained and effective light infantry arm should always be taken into consideration. That was an immense achievement.

I've always thought highly of Moore too.

He had a near stellar career before the Peninsula and, as Brechtel said, given an impossible mission and in the end, dealt something of a strategic blow to Napoleon's efforts to achieve total victory (though, of course it must be said the Austrians played a much larger role within those aspects).

Even Wellington said himself that the British (and Spanish) Armies would not have had a chance in Iberia if it wasn't for Moore.

So, as usual, I will stand by Moore.

Nosey

I agree with Axebreaker. Wellington is in a class of his own. The question to ask is what makes him so

"Daddy" Hill was highly regarded enough to be given independent command in Estremadura in 1811 which is a pretty high endorsement from Wellington. Others all failed in independent commands at one time or another.

Wellington did little to cultivate independent commanders so it is really hard to say, who was next after him.Graham at Barrosa did a lot with very little. Did Hill ever fight a battle on his own? Crauford screwed up at the Coa. Beresford, lacked the ability to write dispatches that were flattering but was always the commander Wellington saw as his successor if it were needed.

I vote for the Duke of YORK!

Wellington.

After him, it would have been interesting to see what Brock would have done if he had not gotten himself killed at Queenston Heights.

Aethelflaeda was framed ' has a point, although the question clearly applies to field commanders where Frederick Duke of York did not shine. The work of York and David Dundas in shaping the army that Wellington and other commanders worked with, is frequently overlooked in popular understanding.

I agree with 42flanker that the Duke wasn't the best field commander, but we also need to recognise that he (like Moore) was put in an impossible position by the idiots in the government.

Sir Henry Simmerson

Next poll: "Best French General of the Napoleonic Wars."

Next poll: "Best French General of the Napoleonic Wars."

That's easy, Davout.

The best British General was all the French Marshals and Generals that made Wellington look so good.