"Hohenlinden or Marengo" Topic

Recently reading an account of Moreau's victory at Hohenlinden, I must admit to being overly impressed with his generalship.
Indeed, without the fortuitous intervention of Richepanse & Decaen, even the awfully average Arch-Duke John may have prevailed.
I have, several times, read that Moreau & this battle were somehow superior to Bonapart & his victory at Marengo.
I'd be interested in reading opinions on this issue.
donald

Superior in terms of final effect rather than generalship, perhaps? Bonaparte was caught asleep at the wheel by Melas and Desaix saved his bacon. Moreau was saved by his subordinates.

Hohenlinden convinced the Austrians to sue for peace, hence people counting it as a greater victory. It built on Marengo. That's not saying anything about how skilful Moeau was or wasn't.

If you are interested, the book worth having is Hohenlinden 1800: Die vergessene Schlacht (the forgotten battle), which is available with an English translation from the author, Gunter Schneider.

Dave, does the author have a website? Like I need another book right now… my wife just got me two for our anniversary and I'm in the middle of a third one.

No – having looked at a few sites, it does not appear to be available easily, so I will flash up Gunter and ask him.

Vtsao – if you email me at david.a.hollins@btconnect.com I can pass you on to Gunter as he has some copies and we can sort out the translation too.

Hohenlinden could be considered the more important victory, in the sense that it brought the Austrians to the peace table. However, without his victory at Marengo Napoleons new power base could not have survived. Both Royalists and Jacobins were waiting for the first council to fail in order to overthrow his regime. A heavy defeat at Marengo, which was on the cards before Desaix turned up, and Napoleon would have been finished. As Napoleon himself said, I can defeat the crowned heads of europe a dozen times, and they will still be kings, but one major setback and I am finished. So Hohenlinden was Militarily the greater. However for the future of a Napoleonic France, Marengo was the greater, for good or for bad depending on your viewpoint.

Surely you mean Hohenlinden was the greater for its strategic outcome (& I would dispute that it, without Marengo, would have sent the Hapsburgs scurrying for the peace table)?
Having perused a rather good book on Hohenlinden, I'm not sure Moreau was such a superior general based on his performance at this battle.
He was certainly not as active during its course as the upstart Bonaparte. I don't think the opposition to M. was quite so determined & effective.
The topic cries out for a book on the twin battles.
donald

Donald

Have you read Arnold's book 'Marengo & Hohenlinden' reprinted in paperback by pen & sword, might be worthwhile, i'm sure dave will have something to say about it, but i found it very useful.

Or is this the title that started the thread?

Mark

Probably, as that is the only book in English published on it since Furse was reprinted in 1993 – although the original was printed early in the century and Furse was like Petre in his admiration of Nap.

The better book is certainly Gunter's (with a typed English translation) – my apologies as it was a long day yesterday, my address is david.a.hollins@btinternet.com – as it uses some interesting French and of course German material, plus there are some superb repros of contemporary paintings by Kobell of French troops (several in colour) if you want that kind of info plus many of the battlefield area.

Arnold is typical of his work – taking the usual secondary French/English material in the main (although one Bourienne hater raved about it, it has some Bourienne too!) – to produce a readable but error ridden text.

Hi, Mark,
Good call: that's the book.
Now I know Arnold has never written for Osprey but I don't think we should rule him out for that.
Well-written (though not translated from the original German), well-researched & gives credit where it's due: to the French, mostly.
cheers, donald

Neither has Gunter Schneider, but his work on Hohenlinden is far superior as he has bothered to read material from both sides. Hardbacks are like p/backs – they can only be assessed on the bais of the material presented and while good writing style is a help, it is no substitute for proper research.

I think Brune's successful advance through NE Italy also gets unfairly overlooked in the "personality- driven" analysis of he campaigns and its effects. There is no doubt that N needed a big victory and would resort to any methods to win and "big it up", but it was Hohenlinden and Mincio, which forced Austria to cave in.

dave,
you must excuse my tone but I've read books in German "translated by the author" before. Fairly impenetrable: I'd prefer to sit with original + dictionary & that's a slog for me but at Least I'm not expecting much.
I, of course, know nothing about Herr Schneider's book but once bitten…
I think you are, as usual, too harsh on Arnold. Some specific criticisms rather than a blanket condemnation based on the fact that he wasn't blessed enough to be born German would be fairer.
Great to see you posting on the Napoleon-Series again! Can we expect to see you there frequently in the future???
regards, donald

Well, I will lost you in a secret – I did the Hohenlinden translation, albeit it is a bit rushed in places. So, it should be pretty readable. Gunter + me then and the best book on it!

On the NSF, I'm afraid my tone was deemed too challenging and sarcastic (I can only read tripe about Lichtenstein so many times until I go sarcastic), so that was my sole contribution, although I should have added that p.355 (much cited by various North American authors) mentions that Gribeauval's garrison gun carriage needed some serious work by Zimmermeister (master carpenter) Reiter at Schweidnitz in 1762 – strange how that never gets mentioned.

Arnold basically ahs only read the secondary French material. That excludes everything at Marengo from the Austrian side bar the translation of Mras's secondary article from the OMZ. On the French side, he is pretty restricted to de Cugnac – there are some 60 participant accounts of what happened and I thus doubt that he has read more than a handful, so inevitably, he is missing a lot of key info and his account largely follows the versions by de C and Furse. Like many authors, he does not think through what he is saying and so, there are contradictions or indeed palces where he goes vague when you can work out what happened. If you know basic Austrian drill and read the accounts, it is easy to see how IR11 starts in front and the Grenadiers are the ones engaging in the final phase of Zach's pursuit. It is a typical book written from secondary material – no harm in it and it is readable, but don't cite it. Indeed, there is an interesting exchange on Amazon – Kevin praises it and another author hacks into JA for using Bourienne (we know Kevin's views on Bourienne!).

Apologies dave. I will concede you write pretty fair English so the translation would be fine. I'm sure being associated with the publication at this level doesn't mean you have a vested interest in it. I will consider purchase….but why hasn't it been published/released in the English speaking world if its so good?
Thank you for your criticisms of some aspects of Arnold's book. Your examples are undoubtedly valid but perhaps not damning in scope or detail.
If you were banned from The Nap-Series, I could put in a good word for you to the moderators. They are (David & Howie especially) good people & I'm sure I could convince them you have much to offer.
donald

Hohenlinden is a costly book to print with plenty of colour in it. This seemed like the only way to get a wider audience – I don't gain fianncially from it.

I was not banned from the NSF – I wastold that challenging Kiley in a direct way (admittedly with some sarcasm) was not what they wanted and every post should be started in a matey way (hello, x etc.). It makes participation pointless. Oh and my knowledge of the 7YW was not apparently relevant either, which is tricky when Lichtenstein was the artillery director in Austria at the time while Gribeauval was mining at Schweidnitz.

So you don't want me to say a word in your favour?

No, don't waste your time as I have already expressed my views.