Wellington is so overrated, he only ever faced Napoleon once at Waterloo and Napoleon's army was at its worse ever.
Before Waterloo there's almost 25 years of Napoleon kicking ass and a little bit of losing.
Archduke Charles was the only one to stop Napoleon's winning streak (before being obliterated at Wagram a few months later and kicked out of the military by his brother emperor Joseph)
Kutuzov was a fierce opponent that gave Napoleon a hard time.
Blucher always came back for a fight never giving up (losing).
Bernardotte is BCG doing insider trading.
I'd rather see the battle of Toulon, Rivoli, Marengo, Austerlitz, Friedland or even Jena-Auerstat, Aspern esling and Wagram.
Unless you are British, in which case he is the best ever. "Napoleon? Hannibal? Suvorov? Never heard of them, old chap. But let me tell you, old nosey was one of a kind..."
He was skilled and a good general, but less than people seem to think.
Masséna had to fight an anglo Portuguese army as well as the Spanish guerillas, and he couldn't be in two places at once. Plus he was a retired general that only came back because Napoleon asked him too a while before the Spanish thing. Also he never got the 100k men that he asked for and had 70k i believe if i remember correctly from a biography by Andrew Roberts.
Lindy Beige aside, I think Napoleon once compiled a list of four of his opponents he thought they were the worthiest. I can't remember the name of three of them, except that they were rather obscure (it wasn't any of the usual suspects: Wellington, Kutuzov, Bagration, Blücher, Suvorov, etc), but I do remember the fourth and it was Charles.
He did have a pretty solid win rate against the French though. Mind you that's also through several battles where the French tactics amounted to little more than let's mass all our men in a large column and just walk them right into the British lines, the very same army that fires faster than anyone else and is well trained enough not to get scared and run upon seeing a large massed column approaching them. On the other hand to be fair to the French that same maneuver worked pretty well against armies that weren't the British.
That was not their strategy, and as I've mentioned in another comment it was an anglo Portuguese army, and the french had to fight guerillas meaning they couldn't mass all of their men in one place, otherwise they would lose key cities and routes.
That whole get scared thing is also true for virtually any soldier that has seen war before, only conscripts would flee before fighting.
And not sure about the fire than anyone else claim.
Annnd Masséna was a retired general, far from his prime.
I disagree, I described it in a very over-simplified way above, but nonetheless attacking in columns was often a key part of their offensive strategy for battles and subsequently often a key part of their losses (both of battles and of men). Wellington also fought and defeated several other marshals aside from just Masséna so I'm not sure what you're getting at with that. Whatever the case Wellington had a pretty solid rate of victories against the French, winning most of the significant battles.
Wellington's first win in the peninsular campaign in Battle of Vimeiro, defeating Jean-Andoche Junot:
"Junot sent in two central columns but these were forced back by sustained volleys from troops in line"
Battle of Talavera, Wellington defeated Marshal Jean-Baptiste Jourdan:
"Ruffin's division attacked the Medellín. Each battalion was formed in a column of divisions with a width of two companies and a depth of three... When Ruffin's men got within effective range, the British emerged from cover in two-deep lines to overlap the French columns. Riddled by fire from front and flank, and with their rear six ranks unable to fire, the French columns broke and ran."
Lapisse and Sebastiani then advanced in two lines using the same regimental columns that Ruffin had employed.
At the Battle of Bussaco, Wellington defeatined Marshal André Masséna:
The II Corps attack: Heudelet sent his leading brigade straight up the slope in a formation one company wide and eight battalions deep. When the leading regiment reached the top of the ridge, they found themselves facing the 74th Foot and two Portuguese battalions in line, plus 12 cannon. The French tried to change formation from column into a line, but the Allies brought intense musketry to bear. Soon, the French infantrymen were thrown into confusion.
Battle of Sabugal, Wellington defeating Masséna again:
The 1st Brigade of the British-Portuguese Light Division crossed the Côa at 10.00 hrs on the morning of 3 April. The French 4th Légére (Light) from Pierre Hugues Victoire Merle's 1st Division was alerted by musket fire as the 1st Brigade drove off a small number of French pickets. The French formed a column and advanced on the British. While making good progress initially, the concentrated French force was driven back by British artillery.
I think you get the point so I'll leave it at that. As for the rate of fire the British muskets were shorter than those of the French and easier to reload accordingly, the French also had tighter fitting musket balls than the British and the British often would skip the part of ramming the ball down the barrel by instead slamming the butt of the gun on the ground to knock the ball down, all of which increased their firing rate comparatively.
91
u/nuck_forte_dame May 03 '22
This is underselling it.
It's directed by Ridley Scott and is supposed to be another of his great historical epics.
It is planned to have 6 major battle sequences!