Worst mistakes made by otherwise competent generals

[EdwardTking]

Blucher: How a septagenarian can survive getting his horse shot out from beneath him is beyond my comprehension.

Well Hurrah for Blucher!!

If he has drawn up a valid battle plan, briefed his staff, given his commanders their orders and appointed a competent second in command and he has a properly trained army, then he may correctly risk his neck.

And at 70+, he has less life left to lose!

Leading from the front (Goose Green) is often better than from the luxury of the chateaux (First World War).

 

[privatehudson]

If he'd have been killed in that charge the whole campaign would have been won by Napoleon.

 

[dgfred]

Actually, I recall reading in a Stonewall biography that faulty maps were a problem in at least one instance early on in the Seven Days ... something about a non-existent bridge over a swollen creek.

Thanks for the back-up , I read the same thing . Maps WERE a
problem there, AND Stonewall was not his usual self .

 

[Adler17]

PH, I don´t think Napoleon would have won this war. With a Prussian army under Gneisenau at the Rhine together with the Swedes, Russians and Austrians Napoleon was doomed. Nevertheless Blücher was never the guy who sits in the Château while outside was fighting. He got his nick Marshal Forward (Marschall Vorwärts) not because of this. Also he was not the man who attacked only with force but he thought all consequences. When he was thinking he could win by charging he acted fereously. Also it is tradition for Prussian/ German marshals to be at the front. From the very beginning to Rommel.

Adler

 

[privatehudson]

PH, I don´t think Napoleon would have won this war

Note I said campaign, not war. Without Blucher, Gneisenau would have taken control and withdrawn the army from supporting the British. The British would have been forced to withdraw without Prussian support. Napoleon would have suceeded in his campaign aims.

Also he was not the man who attacked only with force but he thought all consequences. When he was thinking he could win by charging he acted fereously

Such as at Auerstadt? Oh, my bad it was ok then because he wasn't in overall command Seriously though, throwing yourself into the midst of the enemy for very little gain isn't very much common sense. Blucher doomed himself at Ligny by poor positioning of his men, throwing himself at the enemy at the end of the battle at the head of cavalry wouldn't have altered that much.

 

[Verbose]

History has been kind of divided on Blücher. On the one hand known for never really grasping the use of his flanks in battle ("Vorwärts!" instead.)

His supporters from a century or so ago would stress his qualities as a kind of intuitive romantic military genius. Modern historians seem to lean more towards, agressive but not necessarily in controll.

 

[Andu Indorin]

Blucher doomed himself at Ligny by poor positioning of his men, throwing himself at the enemy at the end of the battle at the head of cavalry wouldn't have altered that much.

Should point out that Blucher's cavalry charge was intended to help cover the retreat of the Prussian infantry. As for the positioning of his troops, many historians have followed Wellington's criticism that he had posted in troops on forward slopes; but these were mainly only reserves. D. Hamilton-Williams "Waterloo: new perspectives" provides an interesting alternative assessment of Blucher's dispositions.

As for Blucher as a leader in general, I wonder how much his reputation has suffered because of his adversity to hogging the glory ...

 

[privatehudson]

Should point out that Blucher's cavalry charge was intended to help cover the retreat of the Prussian infantry

Granted, but my objection to it was based on him being at the head of the action. Cavalry charges may have been needed, him leading them was almost certainly not.

As for the positioning of his troops, many historians have followed Wellington's criticism that he had posted in troops on forward slopes; but these were mainly only reserves. D. Hamilton-Williams "Waterloo: new perspectives" provides an interesting alternative assessment of Blucher's dispositions.

I'll have to re-read that, I don't remember the part there, not saying it's not, I've just forgotten in the year or two since I read the book, thanks for the info

 

[Andu Indorin]

Granted, but my objection to it was based on him being at the head of the action. Cavalry charges may have been needed, him leading them was almost certainly not.

And I'll grant you that. Still, a "priceless" moment.