Introduction:
It is hard to overestimate the historic impact that Napoleon’s failed campaign had on the world. It was the beginning of the end of Napoleon’s control over Europe and within a few years, the make up of Europe moved back to pre-Napoleon times.
Historical Background (from Wikipedia):
It began on 24 June 1812 when Napoleon‘s Grande Armée crossed the Neman River in an attempt to engage and defeat the Russian army.[14]At the start of the invasion, the Grande Armée numbered 680,000 soldiers (including 300,000 soldiers from France). It was the largest army ever known to have been assembled in the history of warfare up to that point.[17] (It is highly noteworthy that an eerily similar campaign took place on almost the same date 129 years later when the German army invaded Russia with the largest force in history.)
Through a series of long marches Napoleon pushed the army rapidly through Western Russia in an attempt to engage and destroy the Russian army, winning a number of minor engagements and a major battle at Smolensk in August. Napoleon hoped the battle would win the war for him, but the Russian army slipped away and continued the retreat, leaving Smolensk to burn.[18] As the Russian army fell back, scorched-earth tactics were employed, resulting in villages, towns and crops being destroyed and forcing the French to rely on a supply system that was incapable of feeding their large army in the field.[15][19] On 7 September, the French caught up with the Russian army which had dug itself in on hillsides before a small town called Borodino, seventy miles west of Moscow. The battle that followed was the bloodiest single-day action of the Napoleonic Wars, with 72,000 casualties, and a narrow French victory. The Russian army withdrew the following day, leaving the French again without the decisive victory Napoleon sought.[20] A week later, Napoleon entered Moscow, which the Russians had abandoned and burned.[21]
The loss of Moscow did not compel Alexander I to enter into negotiations, and Napoleon stayed on in Moscow for a month, waiting for a peace offer that never came. On 19 October, Napoleon and his army left Moscow and marched southwest toward Kaluga, where Field Marshall Mikhail Kutuzov was encamped with the Russian army. After an inconclusive battle at Maloyaroslavets, Napoleon began to retreat back to the Polish border. In the following weeks, the Grande Armée suffered from the onset of the Russian Winter. Lack of food and fodder for the horses, hypothermia from the bitter cold and persistent attacksupon isolated troops from Russian peasants and Cossacks led to great losses in men, and a breakdown of discipline and cohesion in the army. More fighting at Vyazma and Krasnoi resulted in further losses for the French. When the remnants of Napoleon’s main army crossed the Berezina River in late November, only 27,000 soldiers remained; the Grande Armée had lost some 380,000 men dead and 100,000 captured during the campaign.[22] Following the crossing of the Berezina, Napoleon left the army after much urging from his advisors and with the unanimous approval of his Marshals.[23] He returned to Paris to protect his position as Emperor and to raise more forces to resist the advancing Russians. The campaign effectively ended after nearly six months on 14 December 1812, with the last French troops leaving Russian soil.
The campaign was a turning point in the Napoleonic Wars.[1] It was the greatest and bloodiest of the Napoleonic campaigns, involving more than 1.5 million soldiers. The reputation of Napoleon was severely shaken, and French hegemony in Europe was dramatically weakened. The Grande Armée, made up of French and allied invasion forces, was reduced to a fraction of its initial strength. These events triggered a major shift in European politics. France’s ally Prussia, soon followed by Austria, broke their imposed alliance with France and switched sides. This triggered the War of the Sixth Coalition.[2]
The Acts of Providence that Resulted in the French Defeat
There were several acts of providence that were factors in the not-fully understood loss of the great majority of Napoleon’s soldiers, especially considering that he either won or tied every major battle with Russian forces! Yet, the French army had greater casualties of 500,000 vs. the Russian casualties of 400,00. 12] This anomaly is not fully understood and although it is attributed to the Russian winter, it does not fully explain the result.
- The first act of providence was the terrible weather. The weather could not have been worse for the French army. Additionally, it wasn’t just a single weather factor such as a scorching summer heat, or a thundering rain, but it was multiple weather factors that struck in devastating power one after the other. As quoted in Wikipedia: “The thunderstorms of the 24th turned into other downpours, turning the tracks—some diarists claim there were no roads in Lithuania—into bottomless mires. Wagon sank up to their hubs; horses dropped from exhaustion; men lost their boots. Stalled wagons became obstacles that forced men around them and stopped supply wagons and artillery columns. Then came the sun which would bake the deep ruts into canyons of concrete, where horses would break their legs and wagons their wheels.[62] A Lieutenant Mertens—a Württemberger serving with Ney’s III corps—reported in his diary that oppressive heat followed by rain left them with dead horses and camping in swamp-like conditions with dysentery and influenza raging though the ranks with hundreds in a field hospital that had to be set up for the purpose. He reported the times, dates and places, of events reporting thunderstorms on the 6th of June and men dying of sunstroke by the 11th.[62] The Crown Prince of Wurttemberg reported 21 men dead in bivouacs. The Bavarian corps was reporting 345 sick by June 13.”[63]
- The second act of providence was a striking amount of misinformation which heavily affected many French operations and wiped out tens of thousands of soldiers. Here are various quotes from Wikipedia all indicating a lack of communication or worse – deliberate misinformation that devastated Napoleon’s grand army. Here are several passages:
a)Two French Cavalry defeats by Platov kept the French in the dark… Davout thought Bagration had some 60,000 men. b) The lack of recognition of the state of the Russian Army led Napoleon to remain on the battlefield with his army instead of the forced pursuit that had marked other campaigns that he had conducted.[79] The entirety of the Guard was still available to Napoleon and in refusing to use it – because of not having the correct information – he lost this singular chance to destroy the Russian army.[80] c) The French light Cavalry was shocked to find itself outclassed by Russian counterparts so much so that Napoleon had ordered that infantry be provided as back up to French light cavalry units.[63] This affected both French reconnaissance and intelligence operations. Despite 30,000 cavalry, contact was not maintained with Barclay’s forces leaving Napoleon guessing and throwing out columns to find his opposition.[64]d) Doctorov had moved from Djunaszev to Svir narrowly evading French forces (how did he know to move away just in time?) with 11 regiments and a battery of 12 guns heading to join Bagration when moving too late to stay with Doctorov.[65]
It is noteworthy that there are people today who claim (with evidence including even the names of the people involved) that there were outside forces aiding the Russian army specifically through spies who were revealing the French plans to the Russian army while simultaneously feeding false information to the French. The anecdotal evidence as brought above from the various passages from Wikipedia strongly support this claim. - The fact that the Russian army to a very large extent did not engage in an open war with Napoleon’s forces. The fact remains that despite the devastating, and unexpected losses to the French army where everything that could possibly go wrong for them did go wrong – plus more; the Russian army did not stand a chance against the brilliance of a Napoleon-led straight out battle on an open field. Therefore, the Russian army continually retreated and retreated, leaving Napoleon to occupy deserted and burnt-out territory increasing further from his supply base but without having been able to strike a deadly blow on the Russian army who continually chipped away at Napoleon’s grand army. The reason why this is an act of providence is because the Russian high command specifically insisted on a direct battle! We will quote a passage in Wikipedia regarding this point: “Political pressure on Barclay to give battle and the general’s continuing reluctance to do so (viewed as intransigence by the Russian nobility) led to his removal. He was replaced in his position as commander-in-chief by the popular, veteran Mikhail Illarionovich Kutuzov. Kutuzov, however, continued much along the line of the general Russian strategy, fighting the occasional defensive engagement but being careful not to risk the army in an open battle. Instead the Russian army fell back ever deeper into Russia’s interior.” In other words, the Russian high command wanted so much to engage Napoleon in an open battle (which would have been fatal for the Russians) that they removed the commander Barclay for not doing so. Yet, the Russian replacement commander followed exactly the same tactics!
- Another related act of providence is that this new commander who was only appointed because Barclay was removed proved to be extremely shrewd and able. Moreover, the fact that he led the army at this time after being banished by Alexander for having lost to Napoleon earlier was nothing short of miraculous. He gained favor by having amazingly beaten a four times larger Turkish army. Moreover, the fact that Kutuzov was even alive was a miracle, having survived bullet to his head that went through both of his temples. But he lived to lead the shocking victory on the largest army in the world – and then died a year later. “He stepped down from command due to deteriorating health soon after the French left Russia. Kutuzov died in 1813 at Bunzlau and was buried at the Kazan Cathedral in Saint Petersburg. Kutuzov was highly regarded in the works of Russian and Soviet historians.”[3]
- Another related act of providence is that Kutuzov had previously been the general who had lost to Napoleon in the 1806 campaign at the Battle of Austerlitz which is considered one of Napoleon’s greatest victories. In that campaign the allied Russo-Austrian army was defeated by a smaller French army. It is very probable that Kutuzov, having experienced first-hand a defeat by Napoleon in an open battle learned his lesson well that at all costs, the only way to avoid another defeat was by avoiding another open battle, especially considering that in contrast to that battle, it was the French army who now had the stronger and larger force.
