Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

So, as usual, I'm trying to catch up on my Napoleonic War history and I'm curious about the AoN (Army of the North), specifically the Royal Swedish Army. As far as my elementary knowledge is concerned, I know that the Swedes were involved in the battle of GrossBeeren with the Russians and Prussians. I'm not sure how they actual performed or in what capacity they were actually involved (at GrossBeeren) ? How did they do as a whole? Also, during the 1813 Campaign and onwards were there any other significant battles that the Swedes took part in? and If so, is it covered in HPS Leipzig? I would like to play some scenarios as the Swedes to get a feel for the only Army of the Coalition I am most unfamiliar with. Any information is, as always, greatly appreciated.

Regards.

Gary,

to put it short Swedes didn't take part in any more or less significant action neither in 1813 nor in 1814. They stood away from any actions in both Grossbeeren and Dennewitz and arrived too late to take any part at Leipzig. Later on they, if memory helps, were employed to blokade Davout in Hamburg.

This lack of activity was not their fault. Not all of it at least. Excellent Russian corps also didn't have a chance to distinguish itself. But for one episode which is worth a special thread. The point of fact is that in late august-early september the weather in Germany was bad. To simply say bad is to say nothing actually. The rains were so strong that sometimes a main in grey greatcoat on a grey horse was completely invisibly at a distance of several hundred meters. Naturally any movement in these endless oceans of mud was ...how to put it... hindered . In this situation lack of initiative and timidity of Bernadotte played into allies favour. Mind the state Blucher had brought his army of Silesia with all of his marches and countermarches. It was saved from a disaster only by even more monstrous mistakes on the French side.

Back to swedes, would they have to fight or not depended very much not on them. It depended on what road will the French commander choose. Both times they chose the road that left swedes out of battle.

In terms of wargaming the best you can hope for are what-if scenarios. Most importantly two huge campaigns of actions at August an September on a large Berlin map. Although they are called historical it's clear that course and outcomes of the campaign will be different. Plus alternative versions of both Dennewitz and Grossbeeren. I'm not sure if there is a version where they are not fixed during the whole course of battle. It's essential, because otherwise I can not imagine what can make French commander attack the Swedes.Plus there were several "very much alternative" scenarios that include Swedish forces.

As part of H&R we are planning to replay Grosbeeren campaign on a tremendous scale in a very specific and interesting setting. I once or twice mentioned it here. It's somewhat delayed one more time due to my real life constrains. Right now we are playtesting the setting. We are planning to release several "etudes" that will allow future players to get acquainted with the oobs, pdts etc. This will naturally include one or several ones with swedes. Stay tuned!

_________________

Kosyanenko,

I can't wait to try your H & R version of Grossbeeren with the Royal Swedish Army involved!! As it is, in the historical Grossbeeren scenario, My Swedes don't release until 1930!??!?

117 years too late. That's about right.

Al, 1930 aka Military time 7:30pm, but the Swedes were useless anyways right? hahaha!!

Gary, I know prior military, and we use the 24 hour clock in the Post Office, too. The Swedes aren't useless, Bernadotte just kept them in a safe place for future use.

Al,
I stand corrected. I guess I should have said Bernadotte himself was useless & was too passive (as the Swedish Commander) and thus the Royal Swedish Army was never implemented properly.

But...

...Bernadotte was...

...a Marechal of France!

Now what does that tell ya, hmmmm?

A selfish traitor of La Grande Armee!?!?!

Crown Prince Bernadotte was a traitor to his country, and to the commander whom he had sworn to serve.
He proved his selfish and ignoble character over and over, from leaving Davout on his own at Auerstadt, to leading from the front of his routing troops at Wagram. An act which proved the final straw for Napoleon, who relieved him of his command on the spot, upon the actual battlefield.

I seem to recall a movie starring both Charleston Heston (as Bernadotte) and Marlon Brando (as Napoleon), which focused on their relationship, and the events leading up to the craven Gascon's ascension to the Swedish throne.

Now, Brigadier, if you wish to talk about French Marechals, let us opine on Davout, Lannes, and Massena, men who surely are more accuarately to be described as what it meant to be a Marechal of La Grande Armee.

Regards,

Sadly many of naploeon's marechals where substandard in terms of ability.

Berthier was an excellent chief of staff whose organizational skills where the best o any army of it's day. In an actual field command though ( early 1809 moves while the emperor was in Spain ) proved almost disateroous if not for Davout.

Davout was the best of Napoleon's field commanders. I wonder if Waterloo would have been different had Davout been in the field and not in Paris.

Lannes was another good commander but sadly he was killed at Asper-Essling. He could at least talk to Napoleon and not be bullied by him.

I suspect Napolein choose many of his senior commanders based more in his ( naploeon's ) ability to bully them.

_________________

I think Lannes is Napoleon's greatest Marechal. Davout was brilliant but lacked the personal charisma and leadership of Lannes. If you study Lannes's actions leading up to his demise he really was superb. He was also evidently Napoleon's personal friend and his loss scarred the empire forever. Had he been around later he would have made a huge difference in 1813/1814 and 1815 in particular.

He also often wore the uniform of my guard regiment I recall. Another reason I love this regiment!

Also many have maligned Murat over the years but he really was a wonderful cavalry officer. His eye for the ground and leadership of cavalry was famous.

_________________
Marechal Knox

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

"What is history but a fable agreed upon"

Lannes is my favorite, for the reasons that Colin has listed. He was the most 'total package' of all of the Marechals. His untimely death was the undoing of a spectacular career.

Davout is my second favorite. He had much less charisma than Lannes, but was highly intelligent. He took great care of his men and well tended his logistics. He was a most formidable tactician.

Berthier was certainly no field commander, but I absolutely agree with John here. He was the preeminent Chief of Staff. Napoleon would never achieved what he did without Berthier. They were a most essential, and deadly, combination.

Wait....what in the heck am I saying! Complimenting the French Marechals! This Hanoverian officer has gone completely mad. It must have been…..the Jager!

Yes John has raised a crucial thing as Mark mentions also. Berthier was really the intepreter of Napoleon.
I think he was crucial in Napoleon's success. Some even say that when he was gone Napoleon could not understand why his orders were not carried out (in 1815) this is probably because his master communicator of his will was gone.

_________________
Marechal Knox

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

"What is history but a fable agreed upon"