I got bored the other day and visited the local used book store where I found a copy of Napoleon's Russian Campaign by Count Philippe-Paul de Ségur for $4. Never been too interested in anything pre-WWII but I had to give it a try. I must say so far it is pretty good stuff. Is there a more accurate account of the Russian campaign out there or is this as good as it gets? The fellow at the book store got all excited when he saw my purchase. He says not too many young people were interested in history any more. I told him it was a pity.
So, Any thoughts would be appreciated as this era of history is new to me.
Thank You
Ryan

Try this for a more recent account of the 1812 campaign in Russia

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0007123752/202-2529432-3610202

The Napoleonic Wars are still pretty popular subjects for books over here, though it's not easy to find much in English on the fighting which didn't involve the British army.

My dad has a few books about the Napoleonic wars, I've read 2 of them, one of them being The Maxims of Napoleon, its all his strategies and tactics, very interesting read, but you have to keep in mind these guys didnt have long range arty, tanks or airplanes in and around 1812. After finishing reading it, I thought that it was kind of cool being in the mind of a military mastermind for a little bit

Shain ,that period of military history is truly one of the most fascinating there is. Nor (as many believe) was the central figure Napoleon. The 'Napoleonic' wars were a story of Guerrillas, Naval Battles and Military incompetence on an epic scale....

Napoleon, was (in my opinion) a somewhat over-rated miltary commander, whose success was due as much to the incompetence of his opponents as his own military prowess.

There are also some bizarre stores from these wars. My favorite happened in 1810. The entire Allied expeditionary force was stopped for 3 days in a village called Torquemada in Central Spain. Not through military action, but because the British started looting the local wine-cellars... Due to the British Infantry's capacity for alcohol, the entire column was blind-drunk and incapable of moving for days....Jim

Ryan,

Slightly off topic, but if you enjoy the Napoleonic era and want a brilliant historical novel - I can highly recommend the Sharpe series by Bernard Cornwell. It's the tale of a Rifleman, mostly set in the Peninsula campaign.

Rudi

I echo that 150%... Wel witten, well researched and frequently very fiunny - this is a series which should be on every modeller's shelves...Jim

There is an excellent magazine called Military History whcih frequently has articles about battles and campaignes of the Napoleonic wars. I've got 4 or 5 books in my reference library on the subject

Sumpfhund,

It's an excellent book! Though, since de Segur was Napoleon's Aide de Camp you can understand that it seldom finds any fault with him and is somewhat romanticized. I found the burning of Moscow and the French reaction to it rather interesting.

If you enjoyed that book, read "A Diary of A Naploeonic Foot Soldier" Jakob Walter edited by Marc Raeff .It's still in print with Penguin Books I believe. It provides a less romanticized account of the 1812 campaign and the retreat from Moscow. You really get the feeling just how miserable it was and why death was welcomed

One other, "How Far From Austerlitz" Alistair Horne... a good analysis of the Austerlitz campaign.

Military History Quarterly often has really good articles regarding Napoleon.

Sorry..I rambled on.

Best wishes
Steve

Another great book, not just on the Russian campaign, but all of Napoleons campaigns, is David Chandler's Campaigns of Napoleon. It's kind of the "bible" of Napoleonic history.

Jim, this probably should be a separate thread but I totally reject your thesis about Napoleon not being the central figure of the age. If he wasn't I can't for the life of me think who was. Yes, Napoleon quite often benefited by the incompetence of his enemies, but isn't that what all good generals do?

Yes, the incident you mentioned about the drunkenness was very bad. Even worst was the rape of Badajoz. (sp) All armies behaved badly at times, such as when the Spanish were frightened into retreating from the sound of one of their own volleys, before Talavera. The French were also infamous for their looting, so it nearly evens out.

I also whole heartedly recommend the Sharpe series. Also of course C.S Forrester's Hornblower series if you like naval stories.

There are also some bizarre stores from these wars. My favorite happened in 1810. The entire Allied expeditionary force was stopped for 3 days in a village called Torquemada in Central Spain. Not through military action, but because the British started looting the local wine-cellars... Due to the British Infantry's capacity for alcohol, the entire column was blind-drunk and incapable of moving for days....Jim

Jim...We were not drunk! The locals asked us to join them to celebrate Ferria week and help pick olives and oranges. We were not drunk, HONEST! Hic, hic.

Chief

I agree Rodger,

As an under-grad I wrote a paper "Eclipsing The Sun of Austerlitz" in defense of Napoleon's "ability/claim" that he could predict the unfolding of a battle and adjust his plan accordingly and almost will the outcome of a battle...and I used Chandler's book extensively in the process.

I reject Connelly's claims (Blundering to Glory) and those like it, that his successes were a matter of sheer luck.

My additional two bits worth.

O.K. perhaps I was a touch harsh over Napoleon I , however , there were two Generals who had his measure - (debatedly) Blucher and Wellington. Unlike the usual incompetent Aristocratic clowns who usually faced Napoleon, these two were 'down in the dirt, dirty fighters' I'm not going to give you the complete transcript of my Sandhurst thesis, but I have always held one truth to be above all others. No matter what weak-chinned or chromosonically challenged are the British (or poor Irish) Aristocracy, they are not the kind of people one wishes to meet in an alley at midnight....Jim

Now, I'm a huge fan of Wellington, that "bugger that beats the French", but I'm not sure I would bet on him if he had met Nappy 10 years earlier. Wellington certainly had the measure of the French marshals in the Pennisular, but he only met Napoleon once, and not when the Emperor was at his best. If Wellington and Napoleon had met say in 1805 it would have been even more of a "near run thing."

Hmm... now the 1805 theory is an interesting one. I just wonder how that would have played out?

Of course, personally I have always considered some vital factors at play in the Napoleonic wars...

1) Naval Superiority

2)The invasions of both Russia and Spain, were a huge drain on limited resources.

3) Ulimately the 'Poor Bloody Infantry' were a hugely important factor. The British (and Portugese) Infantry were superbly trained, Flexible, disciplined (at least on the battlefied, Badajoz notwithstanding ) and with something the French never got their heads round - Independent Platoon Fire. The French Voltigeurs never even came close to the British Rifleman either (Sharpe apart :-) ) ...Jim