von Winterfeldt | 25 Apr 2019 4:51 a.m. PST |
Who were the other two? Marmont for example, the tandem Blücher / Gneisenau – another example, Bernadotte, Erzherzog Karl, Bennigsen, Moreau, Lecourbe. Ferdinand von Funck, the Saxon liaison officer with the Grande Armee, left a valuable memoir which is useful regarding the marshals. as far as I see he was a commander of Saxon cavalry and not a liason officer, do you confuse him with Odeleben?? Funk wrote memoirs and also a recollection of the campaign of 1812 under Reynier – I cannot see anything valuable regarding the French marshals other than the incompetence of the King of Westphalia and the rigidness of Reynier. |
Gazzola | 25 Apr 2019 5:24 a.m. PST |
How fickle people and history are. If the Russians had not fought at Borodino and Napoleon's Army not eventually destroyed by a mixture of bad weather, lack of supplies and combat, everyone would be asking why did the Russians keep running away? Why didn't they stand and fight. And if the Prussians had not arrived to save Wellington's backside at Waterloo, everyone would be saying why did Wellington risk his army in such a bad position. If you win, everything is fine and tactics generally spot on, but if you lose, those same tactics are the worse you could have done. LOL |
Gunfreak | 25 Apr 2019 10:15 a.m. PST |
The Napoleon lost far more soldiers to fine weather (the heat on the Russian steps killed far more then winter did) Not to mention cossacks, which was one of Russias most powerful weapons but get little credit as they didn't take part in any epic cavalry charge. But cossacks captured and killed far more franchies then any other type of force the Russians had. The French army was destroyed before Borodino, it was militarily unnecessary, only done for honour of mother Russia. The French had little food or other supplies, thousands of French foragers were taken or killed weekly by cossacks or partisans. |
ConnaughtRanger | 25 Apr 2019 2:19 p.m. PST |
When asked to sum up Bonaparte, Dr David Chandler – who knew a bit about the bloke – used the phrase "A great, bad man." |
seneffe | 25 Apr 2019 4:11 p.m. PST |
Gunfreak is quite right about 1812- fine weather did probably as much harm, or more, to the Grande Armee as 'bad' weather did later on. The unsuccessful (and to be honest quite clumsy) attempts to catch both Barclay and Bagration as they retreated through the summer, although very tough on the Russian troops, absolutely shredded the French and their allies- especially the cavalry. Napoleon and his lieutenants had essentially no answer to this strategy and had to watch their corps melt away in front of them, with the likes of Murat even actively contributing further to the terrible wastage rates with pointless manoeuvring. Perhaps Napoleon might have done better by a bit more micro-management of subordinates like that. The strategy played out by Barclay in summer 1812 was hardly brilliant that's true (and for a while cost him his job)- but it was it was thoroughly realistic and certainly more successful than Napoleon's was. |
Brechtel198 | 26 Apr 2019 5:06 a.m. PST |
When asked to sum up Bonaparte, Dr David Chandler – who knew a bit about the bloke – used the phrase "A great, bad man." Baron Fain knew Napoleon personally and worked for him both at home and on campaign: 'Far from being evil, Napoleon was naturally good. If he had been evil with so much power at his disposal, would he be reproached for two or three acts of violence or anger during a government that lasted fifteen years!' |
ConnaughtRanger | 26 Apr 2019 10:20 a.m. PST |
Baron Fain knew Napoleon personally and worked for him both at home and on campaign: 'Far from being evil, Napoleon was naturally good.' Quelle surprise. |
von Winterfeldt | 26 Apr 2019 10:29 a.m. PST |
Odeleben – A Saxon officer attached to Boney's staff was shocked about how rude Boney treated deserved officers, like Berthier, he was explained by courtiers or lackeys, "believe me the emperor is not evil" – well actions spoke a different thing. |
Brechtel198 | 26 Apr 2019 3:24 p.m. PST |
Baron Fain was neither a 'courtier or lackey' nor were Rapp, Savary, and other French general officers. |
von Winterfeldt | 26 Apr 2019 11:24 p.m. PST |
Baron Fain was neither a 'courtier or lackey' nor were Rapp, Savary, and other French general officers. Did I say those were? Rapp wasn't bluntley telling Boney that he was a war monger, the other two persons I don't know I did not research them, other reading the usual trivia as the work by Fain, which points in the direction of a clear hard working lackey. |
von Winterfeldt | 27 Apr 2019 1:08 a.m. PST |
meant to write Rapp was bluntly telling Boney - |
Brechtel198 | 27 Apr 2019 10:36 a.m. PST |
Why was Baron Fain a 'lackey'? I haven't found him so and he didn't write his memoirs looking for any reward from Napoleon. |
Brechtel198 | 27 Apr 2019 12:40 p.m. PST |
Marmont for example, the tandem Blücher / Gneisenau – another example, Bernadotte, Erzherzog Karl, Bennigsen, Moreau, Lecourbe. Bennigsen is a non-starter. As Alexander Mikaberidze notes, he is overrated. Marmont failed as an army commander in Spain and later turned traitor after a poor performance in 1814 in France. Bernadotte failed miserably, perhaps intentionally, in 1806 and 1809 and was relieved and sent home by Napoleon after the latter performance. Moreau was dominated by his wife and mother, performed poorly during the Marengo campaign and might have, or might not have, obeyed the orders of Napoleon during that campaign. His decisive victory at Hohenlinden was the result of his subordinates aggressive actions. Napoleon thought him an 'Excellent soldier, personally brave, capable of handling a small army on the field of battle, but an absolute stranger to strategy.' He ended up by siding with the allies and was mortally wounded by French artillery fire at Dresden in 1813. Blucher and Gneisenau were an excellent team, but Blucher was neither a tactician nor a strategist. Wellington believed that the Archduke Charles was the best of the allied senior commanders. Lecourbe was one of the plethora of excellent French generals that served during the period/ Desaix has been left out which is surprising. He was an outstanding general and commander, and was the conqueror of Upper Egypt. He saved Napoleon at Marengo. |
von Winterfeldt | 27 Apr 2019 11:39 p.m. PST |
I have another opinion, I cannot see where Bernadotte failed in any of his tasks as corps leader or army commander, he was – as so many others made a scapegoat – to cover up serious blunders of the Berthier / Boney duo. According what I read so far about Marmont is that he fought very well – especially in 1814, the traitor question I won't discuss again, it was discussed at length and proven that he wasn't. As to Bennigsen, yes I know what Mikaberidze says, overrated, exactly his words, I don't see him so negative he was only defeated after hard campaigning which ruined the Grand Armée. After the campaign of 1807 and then again 1808 in Spain, it wasn't the superb fighting machine any longer. Reading books, as in your cherished reading list in Esposito / Elting, and books from Naulet (ok I admit more French centric than Anglo Saxon) lead me to that conclusion. Again I voice my opinion only just as you do yours. |
von Winterfeldt | 28 Apr 2019 7:04 a.m. PST |
Moreau was dominated by his wife and mother, performed poorly during the Marengo campaign and might have, or might not have, obeyed the orders of Napoleon during that campaign. His decisive victory at Hohenlinden was the result of his subordinates aggressive actions. I cannot agree at all the Moreau was dominated by his wife and mother, well he slapped Boney in his face by refusing to marry one of his sisters and staying loyal to his love. In case his decisive victory at Hohenlinden – and rightly it was and not Marengo – was the result of his subordinates aggressive actions, I fail to see why this should speak against him, Boney had was well to rely on his subordinates and without them he wouldn't achieve victorious campaigns, without Soult, Ney, Davout, Marmont, Bernadotte, Dupont, Murat, Augereau, Masséna, St. Cyr, MacDonald – no glory. But there Moreau was a rival to Boney, not only in military but well as in moral terms – he had to be stigmatized by the propaganda machine of Boney. His military operations in the revolutionary wars – were quite successful, even deciding a campaign, as in 1800 – and he was fighting not on a second class war theatre, but in Germany against the best generals and units of Austria and he and not Boney invented the corps system, all this has to be downplayed or negated – not to tarnish Boney's glory. In case of being a traitor, the traitor was Boney becoming a dictator, despot and re establishing an aristo system – styling himself emperor and king. I posted a link about the Moreau – Boney feud, for all those who want to learn more about it. One had to go, unfortunately for France it was Moreau. |
42flanker | 28 Apr 2019 10:12 a.m. PST |
'Moreau was dominated by his wife and mother' Members comments have been dismmissed as'psycho-babble' more than once in these fora. Would it be unreasonable to think the above statement should not fall under that heading? |
Brechtel198 | 28 Apr 2019 10:52 a.m. PST |
|
von Winterfeldt | 28 Apr 2019 1:15 p.m. PST |
the thread has run its course, evidently it did show, propaganda was the real genius of Boney which made him great, I move on. |
Au pas de Charge | 29 Apr 2019 8:41 a.m. PST |
I fail to see why being dominated both by one's wife and mother would lead to poor performance in some endeavor in life. I take exception to this! |
Musketballs | 29 Apr 2019 2:19 p.m. PST |
'Have you been fighting with that nasty Bonaparte boy again?' 'Yes, Mum…' 'How many times have you been told about mixing with riff-raff?' 'Sorry, Mum…' |
dogtail | 01 May 2019 12:16 p.m. PST |
Nonetheless, taking a general view of the peaks and troughs of Napoleon´smilitary performance, his contribution to the evolution of operational art was crucial. Claus Telp, the evolution of operational art 1740-1813 |
Brechtel198 | 01 May 2019 3:28 p.m. PST |
And then you have the comment from a disgruntled old German general officer on Napoleon's method of warfare: ‘In my youth we used to march and countermarch all the summer without gaining or losing a square league, and then we went into winter quarters. And now comes an ignorant, hot-headed young man who flies about from Boulogne to Ulm, and from Ulm to the middle of Moravia, and fights battles in December. The whole system of his tactics is monstrously incorrect.' |
Gazzola | 03 May 2019 6:41 a.m. PST |
I think someone has 'moved on' because they just can't accept or cope with anything positive being said about Napoleon the Great. LOL |
Gazzola | 03 May 2019 6:45 a.m. PST |
Gunfreak If the 'French was destroyed before Borodino' how come the wonderful Russian army didn't roll over them at Borodino, instead of retreating and leaving the field to the er, 'destroyed army?' Or, if the it was a 'destroyed' French army at Borodino, how bad must the Russians have been? |
Brechtel198 | 03 May 2019 7:33 a.m. PST |
Fielding 130,000 disciplined and well-led troops does not indicate an army that was destroyed. And, further, they forced the Russians out of a prepared defensive position, inflicting more losses than they incurred and were ready to continue the fighting the next day. Kutusov 'bolted' for Moscow, leaving the field to the French. Perhaps Kutusov was tired of getting thumped by Napoleon and the French. And Kutusov would be defeated by Eugene at Maloyaroslavets and then later fail to support Wittgenstein and Tshitshagov at the Berezina-very likely purposely. |
von Winterfeldt | 03 May 2019 9:28 a.m. PST |
all for naught of course, the end would be sheer catastrophe, hollow victories leading to destruction. |
4th Cuirassier | 03 May 2019 10:27 a.m. PST |
Surely what made Napoleon great was his mastery of the bricole. |
Brechtel198 | 03 May 2019 11:21 a.m. PST |
He was an artilleryman, after all… ‘If there is no one to make gunpowder for cannon, I can fabricate it; gun carriages I know how to construct. If it is necessary to cast cannon, I can cast them; if it is necessary to teach the details of drill, I can do that.'-Napoleon. |