Was Napoleon really a logistical genius and how did his talents in that area compare to his other military and political abilities ?
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsynapticnulship.com%2Fblog%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F09%2Fminard_lg.gif&hash=572964946a9d3c0208de598cf1c14ccf9887ad74)
Logistical Genius, yeah right. If anything his genius was undestanding the hearts of men and the effect that cannonballs and grapeshot and surprise had on the modes of thinking of those men.
He was logistically about the equal of Julius Caesar, although I think Caesar is the superior engineer. Bonaparte may have been the superior strategist, although Caesar is so poorly critiqued, and his tactical prowess so over-stated, that it's nearly impossible to compare. Bonaparte was a perfectly competent tactician, but his logistical abilities were largely based, like Caesar's, on superb scrounging and acquisitiveness. Their non-coms were the greatest of dog-robbers. Bonaparte's invasion of Russia counted on his people's ability to scrounge, which had been legendary throughout his earlier campaigns.
I'll agree that Caesar and Napoleon share most of the same virtues. Kutuzov and Vercingetorix tried to use the same scorched earth trick on each of them; Caesar pulled it off while Napoleon failed.
Edit: I think that the Grognards ability to steal stuff spoiled Napoleon allowing him to ignore logistics for most of his quick and early campaigns in germany and italy.
I dunno; Napoleon learned from and surrounded himself with some of the best mathematicians and chemists in French history. And he applied those principles to warfare and artillery.
Maybe not a engineer in the grandest sense as Caesar, but definitely from an operational perspective.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 12, 2012, 05:16:29 PM
I dunno; Napoleon learned from and surrounded himself with some of the best mathematicians and chemists in French history. And he applied those principles to warfare and artillery.
Maybe not a engineer in the grandest sense as Caesar, but definitely from an operational perspective.
Wasnt the concept of canning invented by a scientist working for Nappy - iirc they used champagn bottles to keep food from spoiling - real champagn obviously :).
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 12, 2012, 05:42:50 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 12, 2012, 05:16:29 PM
I dunno; Napoleon learned from and surrounded himself with some of the best mathematicians and chemists in French history. And he applied those principles to warfare and artillery.
Maybe not a engineer in the grandest sense as Caesar, but definitely from an operational perspective.
Wasnt the concept of canning invented by a scientist working for Nappy - iirc they used champagn bottles to keep food from spoiling - real champagn obviously :).
If I remember correctly from those old
Connections episodes, yes.
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 12, 2012, 06:12:59 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 12, 2012, 05:42:50 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 12, 2012, 05:16:29 PM
I dunno; Napoleon learned from and surrounded himself with some of the best mathematicians and chemists in French history. And he applied those principles to warfare and artillery.
Maybe not a engineer in the grandest sense as Caesar, but definitely from an operational perspective.
Wasnt the concept of canning invented by a scientist working for Nappy - iirc they used champagn bottles to keep food from spoiling - real champagn obviously :).
If I remember correctly from those old Connections episodes, yes.
So is there an modern day equivalent for young people of those programmes, or is it just youtube nowadays ?
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 12, 2012, 06:12:59 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 12, 2012, 05:42:50 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 12, 2012, 05:16:29 PM
I dunno; Napoleon learned from and surrounded himself with some of the best mathematicians and chemists in French history. And he applied those principles to warfare and artillery.
Maybe not a engineer in the grandest sense as Caesar, but definitely from an operational perspective.
Wasnt the concept of canning invented by a scientist working for Nappy - iirc they used champagn bottles to keep food from spoiling - real champagn obviously :).
If I remember correctly from those old Connections episodes, yes.
Yeah, I think that is where I picked up that bit of trivia. I loved that show.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 12, 2012, 06:27:22 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 12, 2012, 06:12:59 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 12, 2012, 05:42:50 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 12, 2012, 05:16:29 PM
I dunno; Napoleon learned from and surrounded himself with some of the best mathematicians and chemists in French history. And he applied those principles to warfare and artillery.
Maybe not a engineer in the grandest sense as Caesar, but definitely from an operational perspective.
Wasnt the concept of canning invented by a scientist working for Nappy - iirc they used champagn bottles to keep food from spoiling - real champagn obviously :).
If I remember correctly from those old Connections episodes, yes.
Yeah, I think that is where I picked up that bit of trivia. I loved that show.
Ironically given my comment, I think James put them all up on Youtube a while back.
Quote from: mongers on April 12, 2012, 06:26:11 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 12, 2012, 06:12:59 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 12, 2012, 05:42:50 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 12, 2012, 05:16:29 PM
I dunno; Napoleon learned from and surrounded himself with some of the best mathematicians and chemists in French history. And he applied those principles to warfare and artillery.
Maybe not a engineer in the grandest sense as Caesar, but definitely from an operational perspective.
Wasnt the concept of canning invented by a scientist working for Nappy - iirc they used champagn bottles to keep food from spoiling - real champagn obviously :).
If I remember correctly from those old Connections episodes, yes.
So is there an modern day equivalent for young people of those programmes, or is it just youtube nowadays ?
There are some good space educational programming, but nothing that really matches
Connections.
Discovery and TLC have turned into shitholes.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 12, 2012, 05:42:50 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 12, 2012, 05:16:29 PM
I dunno; Napoleon learned from and surrounded himself with some of the best mathematicians and chemists in French history. And he applied those principles to warfare and artillery.
Maybe not a engineer in the grandest sense as Caesar, but definitely from an operational perspective.
Wasnt the concept of canning invented by a scientist working for Nappy - iirc they used champagn bottles to keep food from spoiling - real champagn obviously :).
I think it was a candy maker. Though the government gave him a prize.
As for medical services in the Army, in Georges Blond's La Grand Armee, the book really picks on Nappy's lack of concern of the wounded and the lack of ambulances and medical personnel.
Quote from: Scipio on April 12, 2012, 04:39:13 PM
Bonaparte's invasion of Russia counted on his people's ability to scrounge, which had been legendary throughout his earlier campaigns.
Absolutely untrue. Napoleons logistics efforts for 1812 were widespread, in-depth, and took into account that his troops would get little more than forage from the countryside.
They failed, but part of that was due to horrendous weather (torrential downpours at the start of the campaign, and then a heat wave in July that killed off thousands of horses), and partly due to his decision not to stop at Smolensk to end the 1812 campaign, as he had planned.
In Italy, Napoleon's troops were forced to forage. In his other campaigned, they foraged to get supplementary food. napoleon was very conscious of the need for an effective and complete logistics train, and he generally had one until 1812 ruined it. His greatest mistake in 1813, IMO, was moving troops into Germany that he knew couldn't be supported by his logistics train. Had he campaigned with 200,000 men rather than 400,000, he'd probably have been more successful. He was never able to use the numbers he did bring, because the corps had to stay too dispersed in order to feed themselves.
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 12, 2012, 06:33:11 PM
Quote from: mongers on April 12, 2012, 06:26:11 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 12, 2012, 06:12:59 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 12, 2012, 05:42:50 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 12, 2012, 05:16:29 PM
I dunno; Napoleon learned from and surrounded himself with some of the best mathematicians and chemists in French history. And he applied those principles to warfare and artillery.
Maybe not a engineer in the grandest sense as Caesar, but definitely from an operational perspective.
Wasnt the concept of canning invented by a scientist working for Nappy - iirc they used champagn bottles to keep food from spoiling - real champagn obviously :).
If I remember correctly from those old Connections episodes, yes.
So is there an modern day equivalent for young people of those programmes, or is it just youtube nowadays ?
There are some good space educational programming, but nothing that really matches Connections.
Discovery and TLC have turned into shitholes.
There you go, first part of first episode:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcSxL8GUn-g (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcSxL8GUn-g)
I think Grumbler is biased because he served as supply officer under Napoleon.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 12, 2012, 06:43:37 PM
I think Grumbler is biased because he served as supply officer under Napoleon.
He was Jerome Bonaparte's clothes manager.
Didn't Napoleon's logistical support improve a great deal by the time that he went to Russia? He'd come a long way from having to steal everything not nailed down in Italy.
Quote from: Neil on April 12, 2012, 06:44:59 PM
Didn't Napoleon's logistical support improve a great deal by the time that he went to Russia? He'd come a long way from having to steal everything not nailed down in Italy.
When in Rome...
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 12, 2012, 06:35:47 PM
As for medical services in the Army, in Georges Blond's La Grand Armee, the book really picks on Nappy's lack of concern of the wounded and the lack of ambulances and medical personnel.
He was very much a man of his time in that regard. Like most of his contemporaries (Davout, again, being the exception) he considered men not under arms to be of distinctly secondary (if that!) importance. Wounded and ill men needed more food than healthy ones, not less, and yet Napoleon (and most of his contemporaries) allowed for lower rations in the hospital of sickhouse in order to encourage men to get back to their units.
I think the Brits had the only medical service worthy of the name (other than individuals), and that was because the British medical service was largely independent of the military chain of command.
Napoleon did introduce the first ambulances into military service, but that was mostly because he admired Larrey and gave into Larrey's requests, rather than because he thought it was a good thing in and of itself. The French military medical service (other than at the main depots, which were very well-provided) was astonishingly ad hoc and under-staffed, much like those of the Prussians and worse than the Austrians.
Quote(Davout, again, being the exception)
My hero. :wub:
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 12, 2012, 06:47:50 PM
Quote(Davout, again, being the exception)
My hero. :wub:
He's every nerd's hero. In an age when it was considered unmanly to wear glasses unless an old man, he not only wore them, he invented a special set of "combat glasses" that would stay in place even while galloping a horse.
From the moment he was named General of Division in 1800, he was never present at a French defeat.
Yeah, Davout was one cool dude and has quite the faithful following. He's like Slim for Napoleonic fanbois.
He should have the most pluses in Nappy wargames.
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 12, 2012, 08:40:26 PM
He should have the most pluses in Nappy wargames.
If he's on the board, I have him lit up like an SS white-on-black counter. KILL THAT ONE KILL THAT ONE FIRST
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 12, 2012, 05:42:50 PMWasnt the concept of canning invented by a scientist working for Nappy - iirc they used champagn bottles to keep food from spoiling - real champagn obviously :).
Appert was a French technician, yes. It would be a bit much to say he worked "for" Napoléon. He worked on his own, and started provisioning the Navy - until 1809, when he submitted his work and research to officials in Bonaparte's government, who in turn suggested that he either take a patent, or give his invention to the public in return for a prize celebrating his accomplishment. Which he did, by publishing his results, and methods.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 12, 2012, 08:42:07 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 12, 2012, 08:40:26 PM
He should have the most pluses in Nappy wargames.
If he's on the board, I have him lit up like an SS white-on-black counter. KILL THAT ONE KILL THAT ONE FIRST
Watch out, he's got Nappy near him. RUN AWAY.
If any army of the period understood logistics it was the British. They still had the officers and institutional memory of expeditionary forces to colonies, the french executed or exported their equivalent officers. They also had the money to pay for the logistics. In Spain Wellington knew the problems that the French had with supply and guerillas in that wasteland and knowing that forage is difficult or impossible (since the guerillas were already in place) and he knew that he had to placate his useless spanish allies he was willing to spend money on a logistics train. Which, obviouslly, was made easier every time some port opened up to him.
We have two clear cases (Moore in 1809 and Wellington in 1815) of British Armies falling back in good order on prepared and organized supply lines to good ports. No continental army tries anything remotely similar overland and survives.
Quote from: grumbler on April 12, 2012, 08:27:07 PM
From the moment he was named General of Division in 1800, he was never present at a French defeat.
The ambiguity of that sentence is wonderful.
I have never seen evidence that suggests that Napoleon was a logistical genius. If he was then Charles XII was a logistics god.
Swedes will take any opportunity to mention Charles.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 13, 2012, 11:43:10 AM
Swedes will take any opportunity to mention Charles.
I remember in college I was assigned a book on Historiography where the first part of written by Voltaire where he was remarking things one might learn from history where he said something like 'now an obvious lesson one might take from Charles XII would be never to be stuck in Russia over the winter but that is obvious...' and then went on to comment on more subtle lessons of the nutty Charles. I remember thinking 'yeah you would think that would be obvious...'.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 12, 2012, 06:45:51 PM
Quote from: Neil on April 12, 2012, 06:44:59 PM
Didn't Napoleon's logistical support improve a great deal by the time that he went to Russia? He'd come a long way from having to steal everything not nailed down in Italy.
When in Rome...
:lol:
Quote from: Viking on April 12, 2012, 09:00:51 PM
If any army of the period understood logistics it was the British.
Untrue. British military logistics were strictly XVII century stuff. The British didn't understand XIX century logistics, but could get by without that understanding because they really didn't have armies of any size until the end of the wars.
QuoteIn Spain Wellington knew the problems that the French had with supply and guerillas in that wasteland and knowing that forage is difficult or impossible (since the guerillas were already in place) and he knew that he had to placate his useless spanish allies he was willing to spend money on a logistics train. Which, obviouslly, was made easier every time some port opened up to him.
Wellington did no more in terms of logistics than Napoleon. The French failed in the Peninsula because they couldn't protect their logistics, not because they didn't have them.
QuoteWe have two clear cases (Moore in 1809 and Wellington in 1815) of British Armies falling back in good order on prepared and organized supply lines to good ports. No continental army tries anything remotely similar overland and survives.
Moore's army fell to pieces in that retreat, and his logistics fell apart likewise. Soult fell back out of Spain in 1812 in as good order as Wellington fell back in Spain in 1812. Wellington did not fall back in 1815 - that was the year of Waterloo, and Wellington was advancing, not falling back, in that campaign (he won at Waterloo, you might recall, and so didn't have to retreat).
The French withdrew in front of the Austrians in 1805 and 1809 in perfectly good order on prepared and organized supply lines to good depots. No British Army tries anything remotely similar and survives until Wellington does it in 1812.
Quote from: Viking on April 12, 2012, 04:49:40 PMEdit: I think that the Grognards ability to steal stuff spoiled Napoleon allowing him to ignore logistics for most of his quick and early campaigns in germany and italy.
Wasn't this a novelty of Napoleonic campaigns though? Another move from 18th century style warfare, groping towards total war.
I was prompted to ask the question because a female acquaintance of mine mentioned this on facebook, and I thought that's the most interesting assertion/statement I've yet read on the faceplant.
So I though I'd throw the question open to you guys, as I have no knowledge of Napoleonic warfare, save for still owning a copy of 'that book'* from when I was a child.
* the one, no one here has a good word for and seems to a bit like 'The Scottish play'
Quote from: mongers on April 13, 2012, 12:43:53 PM
I was prompted to ask the question because a female acquaintance of mine mentioned this on facebook, and I thought that's the most interesting assertion/statement I've yet read on the faceplant.
Bottom line is that he was not a logistics "genius" (and I can't offhand think of anyone who was), but that he was well ahead of his contemporaries at the start of his career, because he understood both the importance of a logistics chain and the importance of being able to abandon it when the military situation called for it (he spent a lot of effort on making sure his ammunition supply was mobile, for instance, because he knew that one couldn't forage ammo and couldn't go a battle or two without it, while you could forage for food or even go without for a couple of days).
His logistics skill was about on par with his tactical skills; informed by relentless logic and experience, as opposed to inspiration. His strategic skills were more inspired/instinctual, IMO, though he definitely sought to understand them intellectually. By 1815, there were military commanders his equal in logistics and tactics, though none in strategy even then.