Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

Contrast the Duke's leadership format with Napoleon's. Wellington was always at the key point in any battle and the same goes for operational movement.

I say that when Davout and Jerome were making their key turning action on Barclay that if Wellington had been their leader he would have been WITH Jerome and made sure that he did his part ...

Most of Barclay's army would have been bagged ...

Home before the leaves fall ...

Comments?

_________________


Generalfeldmarschall Wilhelm Prinz Peters von Dennewitz

3. Husaren-Regiment, Reserve-Kavallerie, Preußischen Armee-Korps

Honarary CO of Garde-Ulanen Regiment, Garde-Grenadier Kavallerie

NWC Founding Member

For Club Games: I prefer the Single Phase mode of play. I prefer to play with the following options OFF:

MDF, VP4LC, NRO, MTD, CMR, PR, MIM, NDM, OMR (ver 4.07)

There is no doubt in my mind that Wellington would have been exactly where you place him, Bill. He was one of the very best tactical leaders on a field of battle, always carefully positioned at the critical point. I do not, however, think that Wellington was Napoleon's equal in the strategic and operational thinking. Wellington was a Master Tactician. Napoleon was a Master Strategist. Napoleon also had more issues to deal with than Wellington as he was the Emperor of France and the target of the world's affections (or hatred) as it were.

Bill,

May I kindly ask you to answer to earlier comments rather than asking for new ones?

Would you also forgive my ignorance and specify what action in particular do you mean?

_________________

Anton - well for the first point I do not know what "earlier" ones you mean. You would need to supply the link to the thread where I did not answer your question. If you are referring to past differences over the Russian army I, for the sake of peace on this forum, left off the discussion rather than further drive a wedge between myself and certain members on this forum. So it is more than likely that what you refer to is something I will never answer anyway. For the sake of peace my friend.

Secondly, this is the early envelopment attempt by Napoleon early in the 1812 campaign where Davout and Jerome would form the pincers of the army and catch Barclay's army in a trap near Vilna on the 28th of June. Chandler page 774-777.

_________________


Generalfeldmarschall Wilhelm Prinz Peters von Dennewitz

3. Husaren-Regiment, Reserve-Kavallerie, Preußischen Armee-Korps

Honarary CO of Garde-Ulanen Regiment, Garde-Grenadier Kavallerie

NWC Founding Member

For Club Games: I prefer the Single Phase mode of play. I prefer to play with the following options OFF:

MDF, VP4LC, NRO, MTD, CMR, PR, MIM, NDM, OMR (ver 4.07)

Bill,

No, I'm referring to this your post viewtopic.php?f=5&t=11684 There was a comment you didn't reply on. Not that I think it to be something very clever or important. But why should anyone bother to answer your invitation to comment if these comments are neglected?

As for Jerome and Davout. To begin with the maneuver was aimed against Bagration's 2nd army, not Barclay's 1st. And the whole action was more on a scale of march from Boulonge to Ulm rather than a single battle like Waterloo or even Leipzig. So it's strange such considerations should ever arise. There is aslo a point on leadership and leader's role, but I feel that after 10 hours of work I won't be able to elaborate on it extensively. And briefly it's not worth the traffic costs. Even though I have unlimited Internet access

_________________

And yet again, try Dr. Lievens work. It's definately worth the money.

I got used to all kinds of noise in the historical books. Biases to both sides due to particular interests of those writing. When I started reading Lieven I had a strong feeling that something is amiss. At about page 50 I realized that there was nothing to filter out and nothing to offset. It was as unbiassed, as honest and as straightforward as if I was discussing with myself whether I like this piece of cheese or this glass of wine or not. I have no reason to be unhonest with myself in such a issues. Likewise Dr. Lieven does not feel obliged to be false with his readers about the thing that happened almost 200 years ago. The book is worth reading only to make sure such a history and such a historians actually exist in nature.

_________________

You are talking about Russia against Napoleon by Dominic Lieven?
I haven't read it but it seems interesting.

_________________
Général David Guegan

3ème Régiment de Grenadiers - Bataillon d'élite du 3ème Légère
2ème Brigade
Grenadiers de la Réserve
Réserve
La Grande Armée
--------------------------
"From the sublime to the ridiculous is but a step."
Napoléon Bonaparte

Military justice is to justice what military music is to music.
Groucho Marx

Bill I agree Wellington was a fine tactician. However if you examine his deployment before the 1815 campaign you will see he was totally gazumpted by Napoleon's manuever to central position at Charleroi. Actually you would say that in the real heat of the moment Wellington virtually blew it and it was only Blucher's leadership that got him out of a very deep hole.

After Quatre Bras he regained his composure and showed his tactical talents in choosing the ground at Waterloo. However if the Prussians had not arrived at Waterloo as they did Napoleon would have had all of the Guard and Lobau for the decisive attack and Waterloo would have gone down as a great French victory.

In my opinion Wellington is over rated. It was Blucher and more particularly Gneisnau who were the real hero's of 1815 for the allieds. The Prussian army of this period was way better than people realise and its march to flank N's position and then rupture the hinge at Waterloo was decisive.

As regards tactical command Napoleon relied on his Corp system for this. That was the very essence of his system. That is it was focused at the grand tactical or operational level. He also conducted operations in 1815 with the Strategic political goal of seizing Brussells. Actually as a case study 1815 was quite masterful at times from N. The lack of Berthier had a decisive effect though. Connecting the masters ideas with tangible orders was Berthier's own genius.
Waterloo 'new perspectives' is one book that looks at this issue closely but their are others.

As regards the 1812 campaign I give credit to some of the Russian generals. Actually N's manuever approaching Smolensk was quite brilliant but the Russians did well to escape its grasp. I think both Bagration and Barclay are under rated by historians. Something I am sure Anton will agree with.

_________________
Marechal Knox

Prince d'Austerlitz et Comte d'Argentan
Ordre national de la Légion d'honneur

"What is history but a fable agreed upon"

I never consider 1815 when I test Wellington. His operations in the Peninsular are more worth investigating. The army he fought with in 1815 was a ployglot army that was formed based on political sparring between the Germans and himself. Frankly it was a sad mix of troops and he didn't really give them much consideration either. I agree that in that case his operational sense was off. But given the wide sweeping moves to make in Russia one wonders how it would have turned out. Napoleon had the Russian dispatches stating that they were still at Vilna. It was pretty much a case of just move from Point A to Point B with each force.

Eugene got worried about his flank and was slow to march to his point on the map. Jerome never moved ...

In part you cannot fault Eugene. Jerome was a family appointment that never should have been made. He was much better suited to just staying in Westphalia parading his cuirassiers around.

Davout was the only Marechal that had any sense in my book by this time along with Mortier ...

_________________


Generalfeldmarschall Wilhelm Prinz Peters von Dennewitz

3. Husaren-Regiment, Reserve-Kavallerie, Preußischen Armee-Korps

Honarary CO of Garde-Ulanen Regiment, Garde-Grenadier Kavallerie

NWC Founding Member

For Club Games: I prefer the Single Phase mode of play. I prefer to play with the following options OFF:

MDF, VP4LC, NRO, MTD, CMR, PR, MIM, NDM, OMR (ver 4.07)