ericbabe
Posts: 11927
Joined: 3/23/2005 Status: offline
|
I'm going to go with an unusual pick and say that Marshal Berthier, Napoleon's Chief of Staff, was perhaps the single marshal most crucial to the success of the Napoleonic system of warfare. Certainly Berthier was no tactical genius, but Berthier's brilliance at organization seems, IMHO, to be what allowed Napoleon's carefully planned grand tactical maneuvers actually to work in the real world. I came to this opinion when working on "Forge of Freedom", and read descriptions of battles in which CW commanders many times attempted to have their troops perform complicated Napoleonic-style maneuvers, only to find that their command staffs weren't equal to the task of putting these orders into effect on the battlefield. When Soult took over as chief of staff during the 100 Days, he neglected many of Berthier's meticulous protocols for delivering and recording orders, with the result that Vandamme's Corps which was leading the center column before Waterloo failed to receive an important marching order, and the advance of the entire central column came to a hault behind him, and it was only after an hour of delay did the problem even become known to Soult's HQ, and Napoleon himself had to intervene and personally issue new orders to get the army marching again. With Berthier's system of triplicate issuance of orders and order verification, it's inconceivable that one broken-leg could have caused so much confusion and loss of time. So Berthier may not have been dashing, courageous, or tactical, but he was simply brilliant at organizing information. Maybe it's just because I'm a programmer, and so I'd like to think that the people who can best organize information are most likely to triumph on the battlefield.
_____________________________
|