"Marshal Louis N. Davout and the Art of Command" Topic

Good reading… recomended….

PDF link

Amicalement
Armand

A good portion of the author's sources are at least suspect and some are mendacious and therefore useless. The use of this source material in general decreases the usefulness of this paper as source material.

Bourrienne's memoirs were ghostwritten. Bourrienne himself was sacked from his post in Hamburg for extortion and overall dishonesty.

Liddel Hart and Fuller are not good sources for the period as they are inaccurate at best.

Alistair Horne's 'work' on the period is inaccurate.

While Owen Connelly is an excellent historian, his thesis in the reference cited is just a little over the top. In short, it isn't supported by the evidence.

Madame Junot's 'memoirs' are inaccurate and mendacious.

Britt's work is competent, but having used his volume as a text in college, it isn't to my mind something to be used as a period reference.

Chandler's Campaigns are generally good and reliable, but his attempt to characterize Napoleon's methods of warfare are somewhat pedantic. The Esposito/Elting Atlas, which came out two years before campaigns is a much better reference.

Marbot's memoirs are the story of an officer who 'remembers with advantages' and has to be taken with a heavy dose of salt. That being said, his time as an ADC and a regimental commander is probably the most accurate in the memoirs.

Delderfield is a good book and fun to read, but it isn't always accurate. Chandler's book on the marshals is probably the best on the subject.

And it should be remembered that with any account of the 1809 campaign in Germany, Berthier was never the commander of the Army of Germany but served as Napoleon's chief of staff as usual. Napoleon attempted to command from Paris, and the confusion caused by the mixture of written correspondence on Napoleon to Berthier combined with messages telegraphed and arriving out of order was the cause of the staff mess that resulted. Berthier's politely blunt 'suggestion' that Napoleon needed to get in theater as soon as possible was the beginning of bringing order out of chaos.

I have reviewed enough of these earnest but definitely unscholarly theses churned out by the Command and General Staff College to know three things: the authors can't read even French, German, Russian, or Spanish secondary source material, much less anything approaching primary or archival sources; they always choose a topic that is woefully predictable and has been done to death by far better scholars; and the finished product not only fails to deliver even a scintilla of original interpretation but also fails to manage a decent synthesis of whatever is allegedly under discussion.

I was amazed to read that Davout was one of Napoleon's "more underrated marshals." The author must have been residing under a large rock for some time to come to that conclusion.

I wouldn't recommend these theses, regardless of the subject, even to middle-schoolers. They would spend their time more wisely reading Chandler to begin with, and then moving on to other, newer, sources.

Kevin is right: the sources for this exercise in earning a degree would never be accepted by a major university's Master's or doctoral program.

Although I would like to defend a fellow officer, I tend to agree with MaggieC70 about the theses churned out by the C&GSC master's program. Almost all of my contemporaries (1973-1993) could not read any European "foreign" language material which is a shortcoming when attempting a study for which most if not all of the research material is not in English. I include myself in those numbers. Although I did take German and Russian in college, I could not read either one with any degree of completeness.

I would recommend John G. Gallaher's The Iron Marshall: A Biography of Louis N. Davout. My copy is a 2018 edition of the 2000 reprint of the 1976 original. I thought that it was well-written and researched. Major Keefe did lilst it as one of his secondary sources and stated it was "… the best secondary source available." Gallaher, in his new preface to the 2000 edition, stated that works published contemporary to the 1976 publication of his biography and subsequent books and articles "… do not add to Davout's role, or change my opinion of him, or my evaluation of him as a military leader or a man. Thus I have chosen not to undertake a re-writing of The Iron Marshall."

Jim

in fact there is a nice book on that topic

Reichel, Daniel : Davout et l'art de la guerre, Neuchâtel – Paris 1975

Another vote for The Iron Marshall – great book about a great commander

Good to know.
Had the book for years as Davout was always a side interest as a more than capable General, soldier and administratot/ statesman.

Anyone know where the photo on p107 of Austerlitz (murky heights in far distance) and the rural road it's taken from- a D Horward pic?

Thanks
d

Don't forget St. Cyr!

(But,seriously, I read a paper that some Full Boid wrote and one of his sources, of which there were not many, was a WW2 general history…UGH)!

I'm almost finished with Frank's (Coyle) "Into the Storm" and I like both it and HIM, but I'm starting to wonder how many potential duds we have out there???

For a diversion from the norm I'm borrowing a copy of Bluecher from library soon.

Flashback: Skimming The Iron Marshall I note the execution of one Bulow in 1803 for spying (in a very open and stupid way it seems) at Ostend on the assemby of Army of the Ocean Coasts.
Sadly the book doesn't provide much info on the early Davout actions, nor much apart from dashing about at Austerlitz/ Sokolnitz.

This dissertation has some glaring errors alright- "General Michel Kutuzov with 40,000 Russians retreated to Vienna"… oh dear. If they had, maybe th Tabor Bridges incident wouldn't have happened!

Thanks!.

Amicalement
Amrand

Yet another CGSC book report.

Not on this topic- but as it's cited as a reference, anyone know of a copy of Davouts report on Austerlitz?

Would love to know if there's any more detail than the official summaries give.

From link I croaked this crappy collinsdictionary.com/translator which is simply impossible to use now

"Davout's mission, which was on the far right of the French apparatus, was to contain the enemy column head which, leading from the Pratzen plateau, would attempt to carry itself on our rear. For this, the marshal had only 3,300* men from Friants division – the others who could not make this long march would only join, in small groups, in the morning of the day – with the dragons of Bourcier division.

At 8:30 a.m., the 3rd corps entered into action to retake successively the villages of Telnitz [and Sokolnitz- wrong], which Soult's right wing was defending, had to yield to an infinitely larger opponent.

The fight was fierce throughout the day and Sokolnitz changed hands several times, but the Russians would never be able to break through the defence, despite having numerical superiority.

Davout skillfully maneuvered having[ pointless drivel…] The dragon's charges closed the gaps and prohibited any [advance] enemy infantry.

The Battle of Austerlitz ended in this area held by the 3rd Corps; Soult as master of the Pratzen plateau after having beaten the opposing center, made a large wheel from the heights to return to the 'Goldbach' valley and takes from the rear the [idle] left wing of the Russian army [columns] there which were still struggling with Davout on the Telnitz-Sokolnitz line, and thus were locked in a vice [envelopment] to which very few will escape."

Which as a summary is ok, if not 100% accurate, but lacks the detail of what he was doing from 0900-1500 and who with.
Thanks agin for any help,
regards d

@SHaT1984 – this probably has what you are after, but unfortunately is not downloadable:
RELATIONS ET RAPPORTS OFFICIELS DE LA BATAILLE D'AUSTERLITZ : 1805 / MARÉCHAUX ALEXANDRE BERTHIER, LOUIS-NICOLAS DAVOUT, JOACHIM MURAT …[ET AL.] link

PoE
Thanks, possibly.
But I do already have [the translated version of] Berthiers' 'official' version by 'Medusis 2005' (Paris) but printed in US. A facsimile copy A5 in a mock/ faux serif font trying to look important. However the feathered coloured cover of Lejeunes opus makes it look a little farcical, rather than authoritive.

However, like the same on Marengo (apparently), this has been 'touched up' to suit someones likings, so not too hard and fast on it. In fact another Nap.org review page cites yours as "La relation officielle de la bataille d'Austerlitz, d'après les instructions de Napoléon".

napoleon.org/histoire-des-2-empires/articles/pages-napoleoniennes-la-relation-officielle-de-la-bataille-dausterlitz-dapres-les-instructions-de-napoleon

Your one- sounds similar except for Murat et al rapports. And review cites 1810 documentation. So clearly not the same source. Available via FNAC online for 26euro.

Nice multi-national bibliography- napoleon.org/en/history-of-the-two-empires/bibliographies/austerlitz-2-december-1805

@SHaT1984 – Brief report in
Correspondance du maréchal Davout, prince d'Eckmühl : ses commandements, son ministère, 1801-1815. Tome 1 / avec introd. et notes, par Ch. de Mazade,…
Author : Davout, Louis Nicolas (1770-1823).
Publisher : (Paris)
Publication date : 1885
link

Many thanks- also great leads… much delving into…
;-0

Seems like I have to find 'Napoleons Finest: Davout…' after all these years…
I saw on N-S it was subscribed and due to publish 2003, yet 2006 it was barely out. Was there a cheaper version produced?
d

You can also download the original Operations du 3e Corps 1806-1807:

link

Davout's operations in 1806 and 1807 are neatly summarized in Napoleon's Army by HCB Rogers:

link

I believe that Napoleon's Finest might be currently offered at a discount at the book's publishers…