1812 - Napoleon's Fatal March On Moscow - Adam Zamoyski

A while ago, I read Adam Zamoyski's superb study of the Vienna Peace Conference, "Rites Of Peace", and this encouraged me to seek out another work of his concerning the Napoleonic period, "1812 - Napoleon's Fatal March On Moscow".

 

 

 

Zamoyski starts by setting the scene, particularly the respective paths to 1812 followed by Napoleon and Tsar Alexander I, following the peace of Tilsit. Disaffection with Napoleon was growing among his "allies", much goodwill having been forfeited by heavy-handedness and a misunderstanding of the feelings of others. The pretensions of Alexander are illustrated, in so many ways a man of his time, espousing progressive sentiments, but hamstrung by the perilous nature of his own position, and the constant need to take heed of opinions at home.

 

The author also provides a handy guide to how the Continental System began to unravel, and also makes clear how important the whole Polish question was in the equation, something which is often overlooked. Also included in these preliminary chapters is an analysis of the Grande Armee, its strengths and shortcomings, how it had been diluted by attrition and campaigning, and also afflicted by corruption and decadence. 

 

The logistics of the invasion, when set out in their constituent parts, are staggering to contemplate in their intricacy and scale, when we consider that this was a pre-mechanization, pre-motorisation era. It would also seem that the stories about Napoleon's personal involvement in minute details are not exaggerated. It is also sobering to think that these daunting logistics to a large degree envisaged a short war.....

 

The great thing about books like this is that they tell the real story, without resorting to the generalisations and clichés prevalent in other media formats.  Here, for example, we learn that the much-vaunted Russian strategy was conditioned by a multiplicity of factors, and that it was not as calculating and pre-ordained as is sometimes made out, but evolved due to the pressure of events.

 

The elements of this book which I found most enlightening were those which addressed the infighting and tensions within Russian society and its "establishment", and how they affected the course of the campaign. Of the generals, Barclay de Tolly appeared to be largely vindicated in his approach, despite the vitriol aimed at him by many. Even after being "sacrificed", he continued to make astute observations.

 

The portrayal of Kutuzov here is also intriguing. For all his "inspirational" and galvanizing qualities, and his symbolic value, he seems to have been an equivocal influence on matters. The course of the conflict appeared to unfold despite rather than because of his conscious decisions. Indeed, some of the most favourable developments, from a Russian standpoint, occurred because they suppressed the urge to do what their instincts told them to.

 

Also, we get a look at the truth behind the level of patriotic and peasant engagement in the struggle, and the ambiguity which existed in the relationship of the masses with their leader. Even well into the long French retreat, opinion at all levels of Russian society was very volatile, and could have come down in opposition to Tsar Alexander.

 

What emerged to me was the fragility of the French enterprise, with a lack of central purpose and clear objectives, betrayed by Napoleon's stress on diplomacy and symbolic shows of power and unity.

It is probably simplistic to say that the Emperor's powers were on the wane, and some of his misfortunes he brought on himself by his flawed behaviour in the aftermath of Tilsit. The fall-out from this was reflected in the agonizing which afflicted him once on Russian soil. Political anxieties assailed him, and ironically the erratic and contradictory signals emanating from St. Petersburg may have harmed France more than they did the Russians, by thoroughly confusing and misleading Napoleon.

 

It is notable that most of the soldiers in his army still retained implicit faith in Napoleon, even during the most terrible travails. This was most likely due to a combination of blind faith, Bonaparte's remarkable track-record and his hypnotic allure. He was still capable of rising to the heights on occasion, as with the crossing of bridges on the return journey from Moscow, and his political antennae still functioned, if more fitfully than before. Another facet of the tale which stood out for me was how some of Napoleon's generals, Ney for example, retained their professionalism and focus amidst the chaos and misery.

The full horror and relentlessness of the Battle of Borodino is amply conveyed too. Reading those passages, one can fully appreciate why historians regard it as one of the most intensely brutal and horrific days of fighting ever seen. The full desperate ebb and flow of the battle comes across, as does the heart-chilling aftermath.

 

Needless to say, a sizeable portion of this book concentrates on the horrors and hardships suffered by both soldiers and civilians. Indeed, conditions during the initial invasion in the summer of 1812 sound terrible enough, as is testified by the figures of attrition. The retreat from Moscow is captured in all its shades, with stories of brutality and compassion, desperation and resilience, endurance and resignation. We are also shown how various "subcultures" developed, to cope with the cold, the lack of food and shelter, and the over-riding need to survive.

To conclude the book, the author summarizes the events which followed the French retreat from Russia, as the events and policies of 1807 onwards bore bitter fruit for Napoleon. There is a note of pessimism, with persuasive arguments about the more conservative path which European politics took after 1815, perhaps in reaction to the rise of nationalism and the newly aroused aspirations of the "lower orders".

This is an engrossing, diligently researched and beautifully written account of this momentous episode. One thing which occurred me increasingly as I worked my way through it was how little Europe in particular learned from the cruelties, callousness and sheer futility of what happened, as was made clear just over a century later.

England 2 Poland 0

Last night's match was agony to watch, and it can't have been much fun for the England players either. The expressions on the faces after the final whistle betrayed relief more than jubilation, of a great weight being removed from the collective shoulders. Anyway, the important thing is that qualification has been secured, and the hard work and planning for Brazil 2014 can commence in earnest.

On paper at least, England picked a more compact and solid formation, but still the defence was much more of a worry than the creative element of the team. In the event, the feared threat from Robert Lewandowski barely materialised.  Also, England did not require "impact" substitutes, but men to replace tired legs and help to run down the clock...

The game was surprisingly open and stretched for long periods, which was great from an entertainment perspective, but surely not totally to the liking of Roy Hodgson. Whilst England sustained some of the good habits which had been a feature of the match against Montenegro, particularly the interplay involving the front four players, in other respects they were patchy and tentative. The defence just about did enough whenever a threat presented itself, but no more than that.

Once again, Andros Townsend was a breath of fresh air with his uninhibited and direct runs at the opposition defenders. As has often happened in the past, England have discovered a valuable and potent new weapon from an unexpected source ahead of a major tournament. It is hard to see how, fitness permitting, he can be ignored when the party of twenty three is chosen for Brazil.

Much of the second half became very worrying for England, and it was a case of battening down the hatches, and hoping for the storm to pass. It seemed that Poland eventually lost heart and morale when they failed to convert their spells of pressure and dominance into goals. Once this occurred, it was a case of bolstering the midfield with fresh substitutes, avoiding mistakes and using up the remaining seconds.

It was appropriate that Steven Gerrard scored the crucial second goal, as the skipper has shown real commitment to the cause, in his understated way.  Quiet, unfussy leadership, in a similar vein to Roy Hodgson.

Thoughts naturally turn now to next summer, England's prospects, and the likely shape and composition of the team and squad which will go to the World Cup. If Gerrard, Lampard, Rooney and Cole are removed, then this group looks desperately short on experience. Lampard is clearly in the autumn of his career, but will Hodgson feel obliged to take him to Brazil, purely for his experience?. He may yet have work to do to fully cement his place.

The Baines versus Cole debate is very intriguing, and a healthy dilemma to have. It is one of the few areas of the pitch where England have an embarrassment of riches.  It would be very harsh on the Everton man to have to step down, despite Cole's excellence and consistency over a decade or more. Baines looks very much at home in the England side, and I would be tempted to give him the nod. The competition from Cole should spur him to maintain, or even surpass, his current standard.

Another issue which entered my mind when watching the Poland game was whether England need more of a focal point in attack, to hold the ball up.  Whilst the system exhibited in the past two matches has been effective and exciting, it is always nice to have a Plan B, particularly if the stronger nations work out how to effectively combat the likes of Welbeck and Sturridge.  In citing the need for a conventional "centre forward" however, one has to confess that no strong candidates for such a role exactly scream out for consideration!

More fine-tuning in friendlies will hopefully help England to find the correct balance, and the feasibility of the current style in Brazilian conditions will also have to be factored in. England have sometimes struggled when trying to maintain a high tempo mode of playe in warmer climes, although it seems that the weather in Brazil will not be uniformly hot as it was in, say, the two Mexico World Cups of the past.

It looks though as though Hodgson and the players have engendered a good spirit in the camp.  This group of players is noticeably less flamboyant and "showbiz" than previous generations, and this may be no bad thing. There appears to be a real determination to do well, coupled with realism and pragmatism.  You never know, the Three Lions might just surprise a few people....

Euro 2012 Preview

I must admit that it has taken some time for me to summon up much enthusiasm for the upcoming tournament in Poland and Ukraine.  However, now that Euro 2012 is upon us, here are some thoughts on the prospective contenders.

My favourites, if only marginally, are Germany.  After impressing so much with their youthful vigour and cohesion in the World Cup two years ago, they will have matured and become steelier and more resilient in the intervening period.  The potential threats come from many areas of their line-up, and they have the tactical flexibility which many other teams lack.  The Germans do have what looks on paper to be a tough opening group, but they should progress to the quarter-finals with some comfort.

If Germany have progressed since 2010, it is tempting to think that Spain peaked in South Africa, or even before, and that their powers might have waned slightly.  However, they remain a formidable proposition, and possess daunting strength in depth and big-match experience.  It might be time for some of their younger players, or those on the fringe of the first-choice eleven, to assume a greater burden of responsibility.

The Netherlands are another country which should be viewed as potential champions.  The experience of their squad is vast, and their creative options in midfield and forward positions are impressive to say the least.  The likes of Arjen Robben and Robin van Persie will pose problems for any opponents.  The flair is solidly backed up by a bewildering array of talented and solid midfielders.  The Dutch will first have to navigate their way through a difficult group, though.

So what about England?  Well, for once, the pundits, and the nation at large, are being realistic and level-headed about the team's prospects.  Perhaps too many disappointments and cruel reverses over the years have finally had their effect, and instilled a sense of perspective.  That said, Roy Hodgson's understated stewardship and all-round expertise should stand England in good stead.  Some new players, and those overlooked under previous managers, will be keen to make their mark.  However, it is also imperative that the likes of Ashley Cole, Steven Gerrard and Wayne Rooney perform to a good level, to form the bedrock of the effort.

Other teams to look out for?  To be honest, scanning over the sixteen teams, none of them looks especially weak, and this makes predicting form and results very tough, with margins being wafer-thin.  France are difficult to gauge, but a squad containing so many talented and experienced individuals must be respected.  Also, the two host nations will have fervent support, and this will give them a boost.

Let us hope most of all that the next few weeks are remembered for entertaining and memorable football action, rather than unsavoury off-pitch incidents.  I hope that the latter, if they occur, are fully and sensibly covered by the media, and that the powers-that-be do not seek to downplay them, or sweep them under the carpet.  Issues of that gravity must be confronted, addressed and overcome.

My own less-than-scientific analysis of the groups and fixtures suggests that the semi-finalists will be the Netherlands, Spain, Germany and France.  But what do I know?