7 Ludwig von Wolzogen, Mémoires d’un Général d’Infanterie au service de la Prusse et de la Russie (1792–1836), Paris, 2002, pp. 106, 115. V. von Löwenstern, Mémoires du Général-Major Russe Baron de Löwenstern, 2 vols., Paris, 1903, vol. 1, pp. 217, 247–8.
8 SIM, 5, nos. 1 and 2, Ermolov to Alexander, 1 and 10 Aug. 1812, pp. 411–17. V. Kharkevich (ed.), 1812 god v dnevnikakh, zapiskakh i vospominaniiakh sovremennikov, 4 vols., Vilna, 1900–1907, vol. 1, p. 183 (‘Iz zapisok Vistitskago’).
9 S. N. Golubeva (ed.), General Bagration: Sbornik dokumentov i materialov, Moscow, 1945, no. 102, Ermolov to Bagration, 30 June 1812 (12 July NS), pp. 189–90. There is a vast literature on the Decembrists, much of which discusses Ermolov: see e.g. M. A. Davydov, Oppozitsiia ego velichestva, Moscow, 1994. For Alexander’s comment: ‘Zapiski Iakova Ivanovicha de Sanglena: 1776–1831 gg.’, RS, 37, 1883, pp. 1–46, 539–56, at p. 551.
10 See, above all, R. I. Sementkovskii, E. F. Kankrin: Ego zhizn’ i gosudarstvennaia deiatel’nost’, SPB, 1893.
11 Correspondance de l’Empereur Alexandre, no. 73, Alexander to Catherine, 18 Sept. 1812 (OS), pp. 86–93. For Alexander’s key statement on the need to beware public opinion, see VS, 47/1, 1904, no. 19, Alexander to Barclay, 24 November 1812 (OS), pp. 231–3.
12 On Wittgenstein, see MVUA 1812, 13, no. 173, Barclay to Alexander, 18 June 1812 (OS), pp. 183–4; Baggohufvudt’s letter is quoted in I. I. Shelengovskii, Istoriia 69-goRiazanskago polka, 3 vols., Lublin, 1911, vol. 2, p. 143.
13 Mémoires du Général Bennigsen, 3 vols., Paris, n.d., vol. 3, p. 77; see Mémoires de Langeron, Général d’Infanterie dans l’Armée Russe: Campagnes de 1812, 1813, 1814, Paris, 1902, e.g. p. 35, for the view that Bennigsen was Russia’s best tactician.
14 On Barclay’s frustrating efforts to create a mobile magazine, see e.g. V. P. Totfalushin, M. V. Barklai de Tolli v otechestvennoi voine 1812 goda, Saratov, 1991, pp. 29–31.
15 See Pushchin’s diary: V. G. Bortnevskii (ed.), Dnevnik Pavla Pushchina: 1812–1814, Leningrad, 1987, pp. 46–7. Aleksei Nikitin, for instance, notes that most of the Polish Lancer Regiment deserted at Vitebsk: ‘Vospominaniia Nikitina’, in Kharkevich (ed.), 1812 god, vol. 2, pp. 140–41. This may be an exaggeration.
16 M. M. Petrov, ‘Rasskazy sluzhivshego v 1-m egerskom polku polkovnika Mikhaila Petrova o voennoi sluzhbe i zhizni svoei’, in 1812 god: Vospominaniia voinov russkoi armii, Moscow, 1991, pp. 112–355, at pp. 176–7.
17 N. E. Mitarevskii, Rasskazy ob otechestvennoi voine 1812 goda, Moscow, 1878, pp. 13–23. The story about the priests comes from the reminiscences of Ivan Liprandi, the quartermaster general of Sixth Corps: Kharkevich, 1812 god, vol. 2, p. 5: ‘ZamechaniiaI. P. Liprandi’. 18 MVUA 1812, 13, no. 203, Uvarov to Alexander, 19 June 1812 (OS), pp. 206–7.
19 Armand de Caulaincourt, At Napoleon’s Side in Russia, New York, 2003, p. 43. V.M. Bezotosnyi, Razvedka i plany storon v 1812 godu, Moscow, 2005, pp. 58–9, 100–101.
20 Correspondance de Napoléon Ier, 32 vols., Paris, 1858–70, vol. 24, no. 18925, Napoleon to Clarke, 8 July 1812, pp. 33–4.
21 On Orlov’s mission, see e.g. the diary of Nikolai Durnovo for 21 and 22 June 1812 (OS), in A. G. Tartakovskii (ed.), Voennye dnevniki, Moscow, 1990, pp. 79–80.
22 Grabbe, Iz pamiatnikh, pp. 22–35.
23 MVUA 1812, 13, no. 296, Barclay to Alexander, 25 June 1812 (OS), pp. 302–3 and no. 323, 27 June 1812 (OS), pp. 331–3.
24 On the engineers, see I. G. Fabritsius, Glavnoe inzhenernoe upravlenie, SVM, 7, SPB, 1902, pp. 392–5.
25 See the discussion in Bezotosnyi, Razvedka, pp. 112–13, where it is argued that the so-called Pfühl plan was a cunning ploy on Alexander’s part to avoid responsibility for a policy of strategic withdrawal which he considered necessary but did not want to acknowledge.
26 Löwenstern, Mémoires, vol. 1, p. 208. MVUA 1812, 17, Alexander to Bagration, 5 July 1812 (OS), pp. 275–6. Shishkov reproduces the letter to Alexander in his memoirs and discusses the conversations between the three men: N. Kiselev and I. Iu. Samarin (eds.), Zapiski, mneniia i perepiska Admirala A. S. Shishkova, 2 vols., Berlin, 1870, vol. 1, pp. 141–8.
27 For Bagration’s ‘system’, see e.g. his order of the day to his troops of 7 July 1812 and his earlier letter to Arakcheev: General Bagration, nos. 95, pp. 179–80, and 103, which is simply dated June 1812 and is on pp. 190–91. For his proposed diversion, see MVUA 1812, 13, no. 120, Bagration to Alexander, 26 June 1812, pp. 131–3.
28 I. Radozhitskii, Pokhodnyia zapiski artillerista s 1812 po 1816 god, 3 vols., Moscow, 1835, vol. 1, p. 67.
29 See e.g. Löwenstern, Mémoires, vol. 1, p. 209. In defence of Ostermann-Tolstoy, see I. I. Lazhechnikov, ‘Neskol’ko zametok i vospominanii po povodu stat’i “Materialy dlia biografii A. P. Ermolova”’, Russkii vestnik, 31/6, 1864, pp. 783–819. On Ostermann-Tolstoy’s appearance, see Serge Glinka, Pis’ma russkogo ofitsera, Moscow, 1987, p. 316.
30 On the Ingermanland Dragoons, see V. I. Genishta and A. T. Borisovich, Istoriia 3-go dragunskago Ingermanlandskago polka 1704–1904, SPB, 1904, pp. 172–5, and prilozhenie 7. One cannot be absolutely sure that all five promoted NCOs were not nobles but they were certainly not junkers, in other words officer cadets. See G. P. Meshetich, ‘Istoricheskie zapiski voiny rossiian s frantsuzami i dvadtsat’iu plemenami 1812, 1813, 1814 i 1815 godov’, in Vospominaniia voinov russkoi armii: Iz Sobraniia otdela pis’mennykh istochnikov gosudarstvennogo istoricheskogo muzeia, Moscow, 1991, pp. 39–102, at pp. 42–3.
31 Radozhitskii, Pokhodnyia zapiski, pp. 32–3.
32 Here as elsewhere in this chapter my narrative owes much to M. Bogdanovich, Istoriia otechestvennoi voiny 1812 goda, 3 vols., SPB, 1859–60, supported in all moments of uncertainty by Entsiklopediia. On the decision to retreat from Vitebsk, see e.g. Barclay’s explanation to Alexander of 22 July 1812 (OS), MVUA 1812, 14, no. 196, pp. 195–6.
33 See e.g. Barclay’s letter to Alexander of 15 July 1812 (OS) in MVUA 1812, 14, no. 136, pp. 136–7. On Peter Pahlen, see M. Bogdanovich, ‘Graf Petr Petrovich fon der Palen i ego vremia’, VS, 7/8, 1864, pp. 410–25. General Gourgaud as usual defends Napoleon from these attacks but does so partly by blurring the timing of the Russian decision to retreat: Général Gourgaud, Napoléon et la Grande Armée en Russie ou Examen critique de l’ouvrage de M. le Comte de Ségur, Paris, 1826, pp. 132–6.
34 Duc de Fezensac, Souvenirs militaires, Paris, 1863, pp. 221–2; Philippe de Ségur, History of the Expedition to Russia, 1812, 2 vols., Stroud, 2005, vol. 1, p. 145.
35 ‘Zapiski Paskevicha’, in Kharkevich (ed.), 1812 god, vol. 1, pp. 82–119, at p. 96. ‘Zhurnal uchastnika voiny 1812 goda’, VIS, 1/3, 1913, pp. 155–72, at pp. 152–3.
36 SIM, 5, no. 1, 1 August 1812 (OS), Ermolov to Alexander, pp. 411–14.
37 MVUA 1812, 14, no. 257, Alexander to Barclay, 28 July 1812 (OS), pp. 263–4. N. Dubrovin (ed.), Otechestvennaia voina v pis’makh sovremennikov, Moscow, 2006, no. 60, Alexander to Barclay, 30 July 1812 (OS), pp. 68–9.
38 MVUA 1812, 16, no. 59, Barclay to Alexander, 9 Aug. 1812 (OS), pp. 47–8.
39 MVUA 1812, 16, no. 92, Barclay to Alexander, 16 Aug. 1812 (OS), pp. 76–7; 17, Barclay to Chichagov, 31 July 1812 (OS), pp. 167–8; Barclay to Kutuzov, 17 Aug. 1812 (OS), pp. 186–7.
40 Löwenstern, Mémoires, vol. 1, p. 220. Bogdanovich, Istoriia…1812 goda, vol. 1, pp. 234–5.
41 MVUA 1812, 14, no. 277, Bagration to Barclay, 30 July 1812 (OS), pp. 280–81.
42 Golubeva (ed.), General Bagration, no. 129, Bagration to Arakcheev, 29 July 1812 (OS), p. 226.
43 e.g. Popov, Istoriia 48-go pekhotnago Odesskago polka, 2 vols., Moscow, 1911, vol. 1, pp. 7–26. D. V. Dushenkovich, ‘Iz moikh vospominanii ot 1812 goda do 1815 goda’, in 1812 god v vospominaniiakh sovremennikov, Moscow, 1995, pp. 103–35.
44 Baron Fain, Manuscrit de Mil Huit Cent Douze, Paris, 1827, p. 359.
45 Dushenkovich, ‘Iz moikh vospominanii’, in 1812 god v vospominaniiakh, p. 111.
&n
bsp; 46 ‘Zapiski Paskevicha’, in Kharkevich (ed.), 1812 god, vol. 1, pp. 99–103.
47 There is a good discussion of these issues in A. G. Tartakovskii, Nerazgadannyi Barklai, Moscow, 1996, pp. 103–8.
48 ‘Zamechaniia I. P. Liprandi na “Opisanie Otechestvennoi voiny 1812 goda” Mikhailovskago-Danilevskago’, in Kharkevich (ed.), 1812 god, vol. 2, pp. 1–35, at pp. 15–16. Dushenkovich, ‘Iz moikh vospominanii’, p. 111.
49 P. A. Geisman, Svita Ego Imperatorskogo Velichestva po kvartirmeisterskoi chasti v tsarstvovanie Imperatora Aleksandra I, SVM, 4/2/1, SPB, 1902, pp. 313–14. The best source on overburdening is the memoirs of Nikolai Muravev: ‘Zapiski’.
50 Much the best sources on this action are Bogdanovich, Istoriia…1812, vol. 1, pp. 285–9, and Eugen, Memoiren, vol. 2, book 2, pp. 18–41.
51 F. von Schubert, Unter dem Doppeladler, Stuttgart, 1962, p. 97.
52 Kharkevich (ed.), 1812 god, vol. 1, p. 13 (‘Zapiski Shcherbinina’) and pp. 219–24 (‘Iz vospominanii grafa Orlova-Denisova’). SIM, 5, no. 2, Ermolov to Alexander, 10 Aug. 1812 (OS), pp. 414–17.
53 T. Lentz, Nouvelle histoire du Premier Empire, 3 vols., Paris, 2004–7, vol. 2, p. 324.
54 Schubert, Doppeladler, pp. 203–4.
Chapter 6: Borodino and the Fall of Moscow
1 The best source on Riga’s defences is I. G. Fabritsius, Glavnoe inzhenernoe upravlenie, SVM, 7, SPB, 1902, pp. 355–9. As always, M. I. Bogdanovich, Istoriia otechestvennoi voiny 1812 goda, 3 vols., SPB, 1859–60 (here vol. 1, pp. 340–43) and the many relevant entries in Entsiklopediia, are also invaluable. See VS, 53/11, 1910, pp. 30–38 for the memoirs of General Emme, the commandant of the Riga fortress: these are interesting but perhaps a little unfair to General Essen.
2 I derive all troop strengths for 1812 from the relevant entries in Entsiklopediia, unless otherwise stated. For Wittgenstein’s instructions, see MVUA 1812, 17, Barclay to Wittgenstein, 4 July 1812 (OS), pp. 134–5.
3 Bogdanovich, Istoriia…1812, vol. 1, pp. 351–2, makes the point about experience in the Finnish war but see too e.g. two regimental histories: Captain Geniev, Istoriia Pskovskago pekhotnago general-fel’dmarshala kniazia Kutuzova-Smolenskago polka: 1730–1831, Moscow, 1883, pp. 178–82; S. A. Gulevich, Istoriia 8-go pekhotnago Estliandskago polka, SPB, 1911, pp. 128–41. On morale in Wittgenstein’s corps and the impact of victory, see V. Kharkevich (ed.), 1812 god v dnevnikakh, zapiskakh i vospominaniiakh sovremennikov, 4 vols., Vilna, 1900–1907, ‘Zapiski A. I. Antonovskago’, vol. 3, pp. 72–3.
4 See e.g. comments by Mikhailovsky-Danilevsky, in A. G. Tartakovskii (ed.), Voennye dnevniki, Moscow, 1990, pp. 333, 345.
5 On d’Auvray, see e.g. F. von Schubert, Unter dem Doppeladler, Stuttgart, 1962, p. 58; on Sukhozhanet, see e.g., N. M. Zatvornitskii, Pamiat’ o chlenakh voennago soveta, SVM, 3/4, SPB, 1906, pp. 141 ff.
6 On Diebitsch, see e.g. the comments of Aleksandr Chicherin: L. G. Beskrovnyi (ed.), Dnevnik Aleksandra Chicherina, 1812–1813, Moscow, 1966, p. 135. Dnevnik Pavla Pushchina, SPB, 1896, p. 111.
7 Correspondance de Napoléon Ier, 32 vols., Paris, 1858–70, vol. 24, no. 19100, Napoleon to Berthier, 19 Aug. 1812, pp. 158–9.
8 Marshal Gouvion Saint-Cyr, Mémoires pour servir à l’histoire militaire sous le Directoire, le Consulat et l’Empire, Paris, 1831, vol. 3, pp. 79–81; MVUA 1812, 17, Wittgenstein to Alexander, 6 Aug. 1812 (OS), pp. 284–5.
9 Gulevich, Istoriia…Estliandskago polka, pp. 137–41.
10 Saint-Cyr, Mémoires, vol. 3, p. 87.
11 MVUA 1812, 17, no. 32, p. 295: Wittgenstein to Alexander: the letter is dated 25 Aug. (OS) but it seems clear that these reports to the emperor are dated by when Alexander received them rather than when they were written. The sum of 14 million comes from Bogdanovich, Istoriia…1812 goda, vol. 2, p. 72. The figure for the 1811 budget comes from F. P. Shelekhov, Glavnoe intendantskoe upravlenie, SVM, 5/1, SPB, 1903, p. 373. The slight vagueness as regards the number of provinces is caused by complications in defining the word province in the Russia of 1812. Some border districts and Asiatic regions were not called provinces.
12 See e.g. the comments of Major-General Prince Vasili Viazemsky, who commanded a brigade in Tormasov’s army: Tartakovskii (ed.), Voennye dnevniki, pp. 199–215.
13 Langeron calls this army ‘one of the best in Europe’. As deputy commander of this force his view is biased but it was to be proved by the Army of the Danube’s performance. Mémoires de Langeron, Général d’Infanterie dans l’Armée Russe: Campagnes de 1812, 1813, 1814, Paris, 1902, p. 7.
14 VPR, 6, no. 164, Russo-Turkish peace treaty, pp. 406–17.
15 The two key letters from Alexander to Chichagov were written on 6 and 22 July (OS): VIS, 2/3, 1912, pp. 201–6.
16 MVUA 1812, 16, Alexander to Barclay, 7 April 1812 (OS), pp. 181–2.
17 The instructions are VPR, 6, no. 145, 21 April 1812, pp. 363–5.
18 VPR, 6, no. 197, Rumiantsev to Alexander, 5/17 July 1812, pp. 486–90.
19 MVUA 1812, 13, no. 321, Tuyll to Barclay, 26 June/8 July 1812, pp. 329–30. VIS, 2/3, 1912, Alexander to Chichagov, 13 June 1812 (OS), pp. 196–8. On Austrian promises, see in particular Francis II’s conversation with Stackelberg: VPR, 6, no. 158, Stackelberg to Rumiantsev, 29 April/11 May 1812, pp. 393–6.
20 For march-routes and times, see MVUA 1812, vol. 17, pp. 197–8.
21 V. von Löwenstern, Mémoires du Général-Major Russe Baron de Löwenstern, 2 vols., Paris, 1903, vol. 1, p. 250. VS, 47/1, 1904, no. 19, Alexander to Barclay, 24 Nov. 1812 (OS), pp. 231–6.
22 S. Panchulidzev, Istoriia kavalergardov, SPB, 1903, vol. 3, p. 180.
23 N. M. Konshin, ‘Zapiski o 1812 gode’, IV, 8, 1884, pp. 263–86, at pp. 281–2. A.M. Valkovich and A. P. Kapitonov (eds.), Borodino: Dokumental’naia khronika, Moscow, 2004, no. 27, Kutuzov to Alexander, 19 Aug. 1812 (OS), pp. 24–5. Kutuzov, vol. 4i, Moscow, 1954, no. 125, Kutuzov to E. I. Kutuzova, 19 August 1812 (OS), p. 108.
24 Langeron, Mémoires, p. 28. Many wounded were actually abandoned at Mozhaisk but this was exceptional.
25 Carl von Clausewitz, The Campaign of 1812 in Russia, London, 1992, pp. 175–6.
26 Antoine de Jomini, The Art of War, London, 1992, pp. 64–5, 230, 233–8.
27 Eugen, Memoiren, vol. 2, pp. 70–72.
28 F. Glinka, Pis’ma russkogo ofitsera, Moscow, 1987, p. 293.
29 See the comments by Konovnitsyn and General Kreutz (who commanded some of the rearguard’s cavalry) in Kharkevich (ed.), 1812 god, vol. 2, pp. 70–72, 124–5; also Mikhailovsky-Danilevsky’s reminiscences about Konovnitsyn in Tartakovskii (ed.), Voennye dnevniki, pp. 313–16. Bogdanovich, Istoriia…1812, vol. 2, pp. 129–36.
30 Ivan Radozhitskii, Pokhodnyia zapiski artillerista s 1812 po 1816 god, 3 vols., Moscow, 1835, vol. 1, pp. 131–2.
31 For the record of this committee, see Kutuzov, vol. 4i, no. 82, pp. 71–3. For the issues behind the choice, see A. G. Tartakovskii, Nerazgadannyi Barklai, Moscow, 1996, pp. 130–37. A. A. Podmazo, ‘K voprosu o edinom glavnokomanduiushchem v 1812 godu’, in Otechestvennaia voina 1812 goda: Istochniki, pamiatniki, problemy. Materialy X vserossiiskoi nauchnoi konferentsii. Borodino, 3–5 sentiabria 2001 g., Moscow, 2002, pp. 140–46.
32 Dnevnik Pavla Pushchina, 19 Aug. 1812 (OS), p. 59. Correspondance de l’Empereur Alexandre, nos. 70 and 73, Alexander to Catherine, 8 Aug. and 18 Sept. (OS), pp. 81–2, 86–93.
33 The literature on Kutuzov is immense. Probably the best summary is by N. A. Troitskii, Fel’dmarshal Kutuzov: Mify i fakty, Moscow, 2002.
34 On relations among the leading generals, see above all V. Bezotosnyi, ‘Bor’ba general’skikh gruppirovok’, in Epokha 1812 goda: issledovaniia, istochniki, istoriografiia, TGIM, Moscow, 2002, vol. 1, but also Lidiia Ivchenko, Borodino: Legenda i deistvitel’nost’, Moscow, 2002, pp. 6–18.
35 In addition to the sources listed in the previous note, see Mémoires du Général Bennigsen, 3 vols., Paris, n.d., vol. 3, pp. 77–84. On one dispute, concerning the design of
the Raevsky Battery, see I. P. Liprandi, Materialy dlia otechestvennoi voiny 1812 goda: Sobranie statei, SPB, 1867, 176–8.
36 Clausewitz, Campaign, p. 148.
37 The secondary literature on Borodino is vast: English-language readers should start with A. Mikaberidze, The Battle of Borodino, Barnsley, 2007, which provides a clear and fair interpretation, above all from the Russian perspective. Duffy, Borodino, remains a good, brief introduction. As almost always, the place to start in the case of Russian-language work is the entry in Entsiklopediia (in this case ‘Borodinskoe srazhenie’, pp. 80–92), which gives a good summary of the best contemporary Russian interpretation of the battle. The Russian literature on military operations in 1812 is immense, detailed and often very good. An example of this is the three long articles which A. A. Smirnov devotes to the battle at Shevardino on 5 September: these cover tsarist, Soviet and post-Soviet historiography respectively. See Epokha 1812 goda: Issledovaniia, istochniki, istoriografiia, TGIM, Moscow, vol. 3, 2004, pp. 320–51; vol. 4, 2005, pp. 239–71; vol. 5, 2006, pp. 353–68: ‘Chto zhe takoi Shevardinskii redut?’
38 There is a good description of this deployment and its implications in the memoirs of a young staff officer in Fifth Corps, Nikolai Muravev: see ‘Zapiski Nikolaia Nikolaevicha Murav’eva’, RA, 3, 1885, pp. 225–62, at p. 250. For a discussion of casualties caused by artillery fire, see: A. A. Smirnov, ‘Somnitel’nye vystrely’, in Problemy izucheniia istorii otechestvennoi voiny 1812 goda, Saratov, 2002, pp. 150–4.
39 Mark Adkin, The Waterloo Companion, London, 2001, pp. 120–21, 284–301.
40 The distances are from Entsiklopediia, pp. 80–83. Barclay’s report to Kutuzov is in Valkovich and Kapitonov (eds.), Borodino: Dokumental’naia khronika, no. 331, 26 Sept. 1812 (OS), pp. 249–51. In his excellent book Tactics and the Experience of Battle in the Age of Napoleon, London, 1998, Rory Muir states on p. 15 that the Russians had 36,000 men per mile in comparison to 24,000 in Wellington’s army. These calculations are always difficult to make but I suspect that if one looked at where the Russian army actually fought rather than where it was initially deployed the figure would be even higher.
Russia Against Napoleon: The True Story of the Campaigns of War and Peace Page 75
