Napoleon Bonaparte a Logistical Genius ?

[crazy canuck]

Swedes will take any opportunity to mention Charles.

[Valmy]

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...'.

[DGuller]

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...

[grumbler]

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.

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.

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.

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. 

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.

[Sheilbh]

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.

Wasn't this a novelty of Napoleonic campaigns though?  Another move from 18th century style warfare, groping towards total war.

[mongers]

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'

[grumbler]

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.