August Marmont. Marshal with the label of a traitor

103
August Marmont. Marshal with the label of a traitor
Equestrian portrait of Marshal Marmont, attributed to Jacques-Luc Barbier-Valbonne

Article August Marmont. Faithful friend of Bonaparte we talked about Marmont's youth, his acquaintance with the young Bonaparte, the two Italian campaigns, the Egyptian campaign, the war of the Third Coalition. Today we will continue and finish this story.

Marshal Marmont


In April 1809, after the start of another war with Austria, Marmont, at the head of an army of 10, did not act very successfully against the Austrian troops in Dalmatia. However, after the French victory at Regensburg, the Austrians began to withdraw their units to Vienna, and Marmont was able to go on the offensive.



May 17 Marmont was wounded, but remained in the ranks. In June 1809, he led his army to Graz, and in early July, he approached Vienna, where the main French army was already located. Here, after a three-year break, he met with Napoleon. During the battle of Wagram, Marmont's corps was in reserve, but took part in the pursuit of the defeated Austrians. On July 11, he, having entered the rear of the Austrians near the Taya River, joined them in the battle of Znaim (Znaim). He could not stop them, but his actions made Archduke Karl more accommodating: on July 12, a truce was concluded. After that, Marmont finally received the rank of marshal - simultaneously with Oudinot and MacDonald. At the same time, many contemporaries said that if MacDonald became a marshal at the choice of France, Oudinot - at the request of the army, then Marmont - just at the whim of Bonaparte.


Marshal Marmont, portrait by Jean-Baptiste Guérin

After that, Marmont returned to Laibach (Ljubljana), where he stayed until March 1811, when he was forced to replace Massena, who failed to defeat Wellington, at the head of the Portuguese army.

Marmont in the Pyrenean War


According to the memoirs of contemporaries, Marmont arrived in the Pyrenees with a huge number of servants and cooks, many of whom later accompanied the marshal on all his campaigns. No wonder the Duke of Ragusa was then called by his subordinates "King Marmon". But in the military field, Marmont did not distinguish himself.

Ronald Delderfield gives this assessment to the commanders of the armies of the Iberian War:

“Jourdan’s subordinates were Suchet, who considered himself the most reasonable military leader in Spain (this, however, probably happened), Marmont, who thought the same about himself (this, of course, was not), Soult, who considered himself almost a king, and Joseph (Bonaparte), who was a real king, but prayed every night to stop being one.

Marmont immediately ordered the withdrawal of his army from Portugal. He did not have a relationship with King Joseph - like the rest of the marshals and generals of the Iberian War. The only success of Marmont can be considered the deblockade of the city of Rodrigo. And on June 12, 1812, he surrendered Salamanca to Wellington without a fight. An attempted counteroffensive in July was unsuccessful. At the Battle of Salamanca (July 22, 1812), Marmont was wounded and left the battlefield. Then General Bonet, who took command, was also wounded. The French army was defeated and retreated. According to historians, it was saved from complete defeat by General Clausel, who managed to organize a retreat in relative order. After the defeat of Marmon at Salamanca, there was a clear turning point in the Iberian War. This was Wellington's first major victory, "making a name" for this general. And Marmont was forced to be treated until November 1812. Napoleon learned about the defeat at Salamanca on the eve of the Battle of Borodino. He ordered Secretary of War Clarke to remove Marmont from command of the army and to investigate. Bonaparte said to Caulaincourt:

"Marmont talks very cleverly about the war, but turns out to be worse than mediocrity when it comes to action."

Clark accused Marmont of having entered the battle ahead of time, because he did not want to transfer command to King Joseph, who was heading to Salamanca with reinforcements.

On December 14, Marmont arrived in Paris, intending to personally explain his behavior, and on the 17th, the 29th bulletin of the Grand Army was delivered to the capital, from which the French learned about the catastrophe in Russia. Following him, on the night of December 18-19, Bonaparte arrived in Paris. Now everyone was not up to Spain.

Marshal Marmont in the campaign of 1813


Until mid-March 1813, Marmont remained out of work and even managed to visit the family castle in Châtillon. Only on March 20 did he receive an order to go to Germany and take command of the VI Corps. Now he was subordinate to Napoleon and, following his orders, acted quite successfully.

On May 2, Marmont's corps fights in the Battle of Luzen. May 9 he occupies Dresden. Then his soldiers participate in the Battle of Bautzen (May 20-21).

At the end of the armistice, Napoleon divides the army into three parts. The first, led by Oudinot, from Bremen was to go to Berlin and fight the Northern Coalition Army, commanded by Bernadotte. The second army, which was located in Dresden and opposed the Bohemian Allied army, was commanded by Napoleon. Marmont's corps became part of Ney's army, which was sent against Blucher's Silesian army. After the denunciation of the armistice (August 10), Marmont's corps was ordered to march on Dresden and took part in the 2nd day of the battle near this city. After the victory, Marmont pursued the Austrians, took many prisoners, but at that time the corps of General Vandam was defeated at Klum, and at the Katzbach, Blucher defeated Ney's army, weakened by the departure of Marmont's corps. Oudinot loses to Bernadotte at Grosse Beren.

The decisive battle of that campaign was the battle of Leipzig, where Marmont was again subordinated to Ney and fought with parts of the Northern and Silesian armies of the allies for 3 days. On October 16, Marmont personally led the attack of the 20th and 25th Infantry Regiments against the Prussians and was wounded in his left arm.

On October 18, his troops were attacked by the Württemburg cavalrymen who had defected to the Allied side, and then by the Saxon infantrymen. Marmont fought bravely, 4 horses fell under him, his hat was pierced by a bullet.

On October 19, Marmont crossed the Elster River a few minutes before the bridge over it was mistakenly blown up. A significant part of his corps remained in the city.

On October 20, Marmont received an order to lead the remnants of the troops of the III, V, VI and VII corps, only about 15 thousand people were subordinate to him. With them, he took part in the battle of Hanau (October 30), where he managed to push back the Austro-Bavarian units of General Wrede.

On November 2, the remnants of the Grand Army crossed the border with France. And on January 1, allied troops entered French territory. At that time, the balance of power was simply depressing: the 47-strong army of Bonaparte against 200 fighters of the coalition armies. However, the military genius of Napoleon and the stamina of his soldiers once again surprised everyone, almost changing the course stories.

1814 Campaign


On January 26, Bonaparte defeated Blucher at Saint-Dizier. After 3 days (January 29), at Brienne, the French defeated the Prussians and the Russian corps of Osten-Saken allied to them. The clash with the army of Schwarzenberg at La Rothiere on February 1 was unsuccessful. But already on February 10, in the battle of Champobert, where Marmont distinguished himself, the Russian corps of General Olsufiev was defeated (its commander was captured by a 19-year-old French recruit). Upon learning of this victory, Napoleon even said:

"One more day like this and I'll be back on the Vistula."

However, seeing the gloomy faces of the generals standing nearby, the emperor added:

"There I will make peace by agreeing to a natural frontier along the Rhine."


Napoleon Bonaparte in 1814. Illustration from William Milligan Sloan's book The Life of Napoleon Bonaparte

Bonaparte's series of last victories continued. The very next day (February 11), the Allies were defeated at Montmirail. Then they were defeated at Chateau-Thierry.

Marmont successfully acted against Blucher's troops, but in the battle of Laon, his soldiers not only failed to fulfill the order to capture the village of Ati, but also fled, led by the marshal, during the Prussians' night counterattack. Only the unexpected help of a detachment of Colonel Favier who happened to be here helped to avoid a catastrophe. Nevertheless, Marmont retreated 6 miles, and Napoleon became furious, which was shared by Berthier, who later said:

"The emperor had every right to cut him to death on the spot."

And Bonaparte himself wrote to his brother Joseph:

"Probably, the enemy would have left us Laon, fearing our attack, if it were not for the wild stupidity of the Duke of Ragusa, who behaved like a second lieutenant."

Many researchers consider this quarrel between the emperor and his marshal fatal. After her, none of them said a single good word about their counterparts.

Meanwhile, left against Schwarzenberg, Oudinot and MacDonald were defeated and retreated. And Marmont still managed to distinguish himself by throwing back Russian troops from Reims, commanded by Count Saint-Prix, who was killed in this battle. And here again there was an unpleasant conversation for Marmont with the emperor, who could not forgive his behavior in the battle of Laon.

Betrayal


On March 20-21, Napoleon managed to defeat Schwarzenberg's army at Ars-sur-Aube. The Austrians escaped defeat, since Bonaparte did not have the strength to pursue them. Further battles in France seemed hopeless to Napoleon. And then a bold plan came into his head - to take his opponents behind him, going into their rear and cutting them off from the Rhine. From the experience of past campaigns, Napoleon knew that the opponents did not dare to leave him "unattended" and therefore he was sure that now they would follow him and his army. It is quite possible that this would have happened. However, the Allies intercepted a courier with a letter outlining this plan. And Talleyrand, who had long betrayed the emperor, strongly advised them to go to Paris.

On March 28, Napoleon learned that two enemy armies were moving towards his capital. He rushed back, but it was too late. On March 25, Mortier and Marmont were defeated in the battle of Fer-Champenoise, and this opened the way for the allies to Paris, to the suburbs of which they approached on March 29. The emperor's brother Joseph gave Marmont permission to enter into negotiations with the enemy - and the purpose of these negotiations was only to save Paris from destruction. Joseph Bonaparte himself and Minister of War Clark fled from Paris that day. The defenders of the capital still held out, but on the night of March 30-31, not knowing that Bonaparte had already arrived at Fontainebleau, Marmont signed a truce and withdrew troops from Paris.


Entry of the Allied Forces into Paris on March 31, 1814 Engraving by an unknown artist

On April 1, Bonaparte arrived at Marmont's headquarters and, after a short conversation with him, returned to Fontainebleau. And Marmont had already entered into correspondence with Schwarzenberg and was inclined to treason.

Marmont himself justified his actions in his memoirs:

“I saw the collapse of Napoleon, my friend, my benefactor, and this collapse was inevitable, since all means of defense were exhausted. If this collapse were delayed by a few more days, would it not entail the collapse of the whole country? ... So was it necessary to continue to remain loyal to him to the detriment of France itself? ...

However deep my personal interest in Napoleon, I could not but admit his guilt before France. He alone created this abyss that swallowed us...

I have done my duty enough in this campaign ... more than any of my friends have paid in these dire circumstances. These were unprecedented efforts, and didn’t I pay all of Napoleon’s bills with them, didn’t I exceed my tasks and obligations to him? ...

All the generals who were under my command gathered at my place, and I gave them the last news from Paris. The opinion was unanimous. It was decided to recognize the provisional government and join it in the name of saving France.

At this time, other marshals who had previously been loyal to Napoleon considered it possible not to obey him. Marshal MacDonald, for example, refused to attack Vitry, stating:

"Let your guard do it first, sire!"

Sabotaged the orders of Emperor Augereau. In the battle of Geneva, he abandoned his troops, and then surrendered Lyon without a fight. Married to the sister of Bonaparte, the Neapolitan king Murat, together with the Austrians, attacked the possessions of Eugene Beauharnais in Italy. Faithful to Emperor Davout was far away, defending the besieged Hamburg. Marshal Suchet was still in Spain, and Soult fought back to Toulouse, where his army would be defeated in the last big battle of 1814. Moreover, the Senate has already issued a decree removing Bonaparte from power. And the municipal council of Paris issued an appeal to the marshals and generals, in which he urged them to recognize the Bourbon dynasty and go over to the side of Louis XVIII.

Napoleon believed that he could still push the opponents away from the capital and gathered troops. On April 3, he still had an army of 60 thousand people. With him were Berthier and Caulaincourt. Of course, the emperor also counted on 14 thousand soldiers of Marmont, but on the night of April 4, he had already sent a letter to Schwarzenberg, in which he spoke of his readiness to surrender his army to the allies. In exchange, he demanded that the soldiers leave weapon, as well as guarantees for the preservation of the life and freedom of Bonaparte.

The time of Emperor Napoleon was coming to an end. On April 4, old comrades-in-arms came to him - Ney, Oudinot, Lefevre, Macdonald and Moncey. Ney and Oudinot, on behalf of all those present, demanded that Napoleon relinquish power. So far, it was only about his abdication in favor of his three-year-old son. Empress Marie-Louise, the daughter of the Austrian emperor, was to become the regent. Napoleon failed to convince them to continue the fight, the emperor surrendered.


Illustration from W. Sloan's book "The Life of Napoleon Bonaparte", 1896: Napoleon signs the act of abdication. Standing nearby: Marmont, Ney, Caulaincourt, Oudinot, MacDonald. However, Marmont was not actually here.

Having received the signature of Bonaparte, Ney, Caulaincourt and Macdonald went to negotiate with the allies. They were reluctantly joined by Marmont, who had already decided on the betrayal. They had a chance of success, and quite good: at least Austria, which, through Marie-Louise and her son, actually gained control over France, should have treated this plan more than favorably.

The whole combination was broken by the strange surrender of Marmont's army. Napoleon later said:

"I was betrayed by Marmont, whom I had the right to call my son, my child, my creation."

But Marmont claimed that, having learned about the abdication of Napoleon, he stopped negotiations with Schwarzenberg and, leaving the army to General Souam, went with other marshals to Paris. However, on the night of April 5, his army was surrendered to the Allies. Most researchers agree with Bonaparte, believing that the order to surrender was given by Marmont - before leaving for Paris. However, some believe that in his absence, Suam simply lost his nerve. Colonel Gaspar Gourgo appeared to him, ordering him to appear before the emperor. Later it turned out that Bonaparte, abandoned by everyone, suffered from loneliness and wanted to find a company for dinner. But Suam imagined that it was he who would have to be responsible for the unauthorized abandonment of Paris and "separate" negotiations with the enemy. It should be borne in mind that Suam was previously a friend of the generals Moreau and Pichegru, who were opposed to Bonaparte, and he was even arrested in the Pichegru case. And therefore, he did not hope for the indulgence of the emperor.

One way or another, following the order of Marmont, or acting independently, the general raised the soldiers and led them to Versailles. The soldiers, confident that they were being led to attack the enemy army, unexpectedly found themselves between two lines of armed Austrians. They refused to surrender, and, having escaped from the encirclement of enemies who did not understand anything (these strange French somehow surrendered incorrectly), not controlled by anyone, they went to Rambouillet. Marmont managed to intercept them and direct them to Mantes. Here they were until the end of the Allied negotiations with Bonaparte.

Meanwhile, on April 4, the marshals-delegates met with Alexander I, who listened to them quite favorably, but said that he had to consult with the allies. But already on April 5 he announced that in connection with the surrender of the Marmont corps, we can only talk about the unconditional abdication of Bonaparte.

They say that Marmont then said to the marshals:

"Everything is lost! I'm dishonored! My corps at night, on the orders of General Suam, went over to the enemy. I would give my hand for it not to happen."

The answer was this:

“Is it really just a hand? Here, perhaps, even your head would not be enough. "

Some authors claim that MacDonald said these words, others claim that Ney said them.

April 6, 1814 Napoleon was forced to sign a new act of renunciation - already on the terms of the allies. He now renounced the imperial throne both for himself and for his son.


Paul Delaroche. Napoleon after his abdication at Fontainebleau

On April 12, Bonaparte made an unsuccessful attempt at poisoning. April 28, he left Fontainebleau and went to the island of Elba.

Marmont in the service of the Bourbons


It must be said that Marmont did not immediately feel the weight of the people's contempt. He imagined himself the new General Monck and a patriot who had managed to save France from endless wars and reconcile society. Court sycophants called him "savior of the Fatherland”, Louis XVIII granted him the title of peer and retained the title of duke, awarded him the Order of St. Louis. It should be noted that these royal favors did not exceed the awards given to other marshals of Bonaparte. Some of them got even more.

Perhaps Marmont would indeed have remained in the memory of his descendants as a man who saved France from senseless bloodshed, but he was let down by the Bourbons, who, in the words of Talleyrand, “nothing was forgotten, nothing was understood and nothing was learned". Very soon, with the growing disappointment in Louis XVIII and his entourage, the attitude towards Marmont also changed. Even the guardsmen of the 6th company of the royal bodyguards subordinate to him began to be called "company of Judas". But Marmont had nowhere to retreat. He was one of the three marshals who accompanied the king during his flight on the return of Bonaparte, and Napoleon excluded him from the list of marshals. Marmont later voted for Ney's execution. In 1817 he was sent to put down an uprising in Lyon. In 1825, Marmont also became a Knight of the Order of the Holy Spirit. In 1826 he attended the coronation of Nicholas I and received from him the highest order of the Russian Empire - St. Andrew the First-Called. It is curious that he then wanted to inspect the field of the Battle of Borodino, in which he did not participate. Finally, in 1828 he became a member of the Supreme Military Council.

The last years of Marmont's life


Marmont's career ended after the final fall of the Bourbons in 1830. During the July Revolution, he was appointed governor of Paris. Having received the orderclean up the streets”, Marmont hesitated for a long time and missed the time. But then, starting on July 28, he acted with exceptional cruelty, finally burying his reputation in France.

After the abdication of Charles X, Marmont left France forever and wandered around Europe until his death. In Vienna, under an agreement with the local imperial court, for 3 months he “enlightened” the 20-year-old son of Napoleon, the Duke of Reichstadt, trying to convince the young man that his parent was “immoral, evil and bloodthirsty personality". And, I must say, I have achieved some success.

As we said in a previous article August Marmont. Faithful friend of Bonaparte, this marshal died in Venice - March 3, 1852. Later, his body was transported to his hometown of Châtillon and buried in the local cemetery.
103 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +5
    20 February 2022 06: 13
    How many traitors turned out to be around Napoleon, received their titles, status, orders, medals from him, and this is the result ... they say correctly only their own betray.
    Ordinary soldiers remained loyal to their emperor until they were betrayed by their commanders.
    Although such is life, while the emperor was successful, everyone around him fawned over him, as soon as he turned out to be a powerless lion with a broken trough, the environment threw him like a used rag.
    The result of Napoleon's life is France, ruined and exhausted by continuous wars.
    1. +10
      20 February 2022 06: 26
      Pretty much the emperor got everyone. Although, in civilian life, he was cooler than in war. And if he had calmed down at a certain time, he would have made candy out of France. After all, even the allies were ready to lag behind him.
      1. 0
        20 February 2022 06: 32
        Alas, the ambition to become the ruler of the world ruined him ... but not only him ... the current new contenders for the post of emperor of the Earth will have to go through this.
      2. +4
        20 February 2022 11: 10
        This is if he agreed with England, the continental blockade would significantly affect the economy of France, Tarle described this well.
    2. +7
      20 February 2022 07: 52
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      How many traitors turned out to be around Napoleon, received their titles, status, orders, medals from him, and this is the result ... they say correctly only their own betray.

      This is their betrayal. They were simple soldiers. Napoleon made them dukes, marshals, and some kings. They already had something to lose if they had remained with Napoleon to the end .. So they betrayed him in order to keep everything that they received from him.
      ps Years and centuries pass, but nothing in this world changes. If after a certain time you have to make a choice, the current ones will do the same as the marshals of France. The current oligarchs, ministers and other officials have more wealth and privileges than these French marshals
  2. +3
    20 February 2022 07: 18
    Betrayal
    But Paris was saved. smile
    1. +3
      20 February 2022 10: 11
      But Paris was saved.


      "Paris is worth a mass." (c)))
  3. -3
    20 February 2022 07: 28
    At that time, the balance of power was simply depressing: the 47-strong army of Bonaparte against 200 fighters of the coalition armies. However, the military genius of Napoleon and the stamina of his soldiers once again surprised everyone, almost changing the course of history.

    Didn't have emaciated France has no chance.

    trying to convince the young man that his parent was "immoral, evil and bloodthirsty personality". And, I must say, I have achieved some success.

    It's not hard, because that's what he was.

    Marmont in 1814 did absolutely the right thing and saved from death many thousands of people whom Napoleon, without hesitation, would have thrown into a meat grinder, saving his already doomed worthless power.
  4. +6
    20 February 2022 09: 33
    But Marmont claimed that, having learned about the abdication of Napoleon, he stopped negotiations with Schwarzenberg and, leaving the army to General Souam, went with other marshals to Paris. However, on the night of April 5, his army was surrendered to the Allies. Most researchers agree with Bonaparte, believing that the order to surrender was given by Marmont - before leaving for Paris.


    Where is the truth, where is the truth, you will not understand
    To another, the light in the window is a lie.

    Good Sunday morning, dear friends! So let's glorify a peaceful day! drinks )))
    1. +5
      20 February 2022 10: 14
      So let's celebrate a peaceful day

      Si vis pacem, bellum for
      smile

      Good morning, Luda. love
      1. +4
        20 February 2022 10: 41
        Good morning, Kostya!
        So life is sweet, although it looks like a strange chewing gum, from which you get out to where you can breathe, but ... Pull out the tail, the legs are stuck, pull out the legs - the tail is stuck wassat )))
        1. +5
          20 February 2022 10: 53
          Pull out the tail, the legs are stuck, pull out the legs - the tail is stuck


          It could be worse... laughing

          1. +4
            20 February 2022 10: 56
            Yeah)))
            The roads we choose wassat )))
            But under the proposed circumstances - try to guess what awaits you.
            1. +4
              20 February 2022 11: 15
              The roads we choose


              You just have to always be mindful of Bolivar's stamina and have a Smith & Wesson on hand just in case. wink



              try to guess what awaits you.


              And that's exactly what Messrs. Horatio Smith and Daniel Wesson took care of. smile

              1. +4
                20 February 2022 12: 17
                Out of the corner of my eye, I caught a series about the resettlement of Germans in one of the desert American states. This is a backstory to the next series with Kevin Cosner as a modern-day descendant of those settlers. So, about immigrants. Bandits and Indians all around. Half arrived. Everything was really decided by Smith and Wesson and fighting spirit. It's true.
                1. +3
                  20 February 2022 12: 28
                  and fighting spirit

                  The main thing is not to lose it! wassat
              2. 0
                20 February 2022 20: 06
                Konstantin, but, after all, there was also Colonel Colt: "the equalizer of people." What do you "offend" him?
                1. +1
                  20 February 2022 20: 24
                  What are you, Vera, it is impossible to offend Colt. It's just that the anti-hero in "Business People" had exactly "Smith and Wesson", that's all. You just don’t understand revolvers, but the people immediately understood everything, so there were no questions. smile
                  1. +1
                    20 February 2022 20: 47
                    I agree: the revolvers are the same to me, but I distinguish emblems. Just in the morning with a "girlfriend" they watched Zhuk: she looked for "colts", and read which finger she would poke
                    R.
                    S
                    I'm not sure that everyone distinguishes between revolver systems.
                    1. 0
                      21 February 2022 11: 44
                      I'm not sure that everyone distinguishes between revolver systems.

                      Most understand, there are characteristic external features, in addition to the brand of the manufacturer.
                      Here is Shark's revolver from the movie - "Smith and Wesson Russian Model 1874".

                      Separate photo of the same revolver.

                      Lower -- "Colt Frontier arr. 1877"

                      Just compare their appearance.))
            2. +5
              20 February 2022 12: 05
              "what awaits you."
              Today I read one poem, the author Vadim Doroshenko. About a dream.



              The dream is clearly not prophetic.
              Good morning Lyudmila Yakovlevna! hi
              Sorry, I messed up a little with screenshots. Sorry!
              1. +1
                20 February 2022 12: 33
                Good afternoon, dear Sergey Vladimirovich! )))
                Finally appeared! I suppose yesterday he was all at work, waving his hands in a commanding manner, laying bricks?
                Is today like a holiday? )))
                And the poem is really a dream, and for someone, maybe a terrible one.
                1. +4
                  20 February 2022 12: 43
                  Yeah, yeah. Starting from 7.10 Moscow time. The beginning was not bad, and then? And then it was .... bad. No.
                  1. +5
                    20 February 2022 13: 04
                    I am simply amazed by your ability to root for hockey at the Olympics. After Sochi, I withered. There was so much dirt with test tubes, so much economic dirt around the construction of facilities that I drowned in it and did not swim up. It became somehow irrelevant.
                    1. +5
                      20 February 2022 13: 17
                      So it's eternal!
                      Indifference? Yes. Sometimes ... comes up. angry
                      1. 0
                        20 February 2022 20: 33
                        Sergey, I looked in fits and starts and it seemed to me that the speed was not enough.
                        The Finnish team won due to accuracy: risk is taboo for them. This is a layman's opinion. I learned a little from my husband, I fantasized a little.
                2. 0
                  20 February 2022 13: 19
                  Terrible. For the mentioned persons. This is if suddenly! bully
                  1. +1
                    20 February 2022 13: 39
                    "It if suddenly!"
                    With the current technical capabilities at the studio, everything will be depicted and filmed for you. Up to the shedding of blood by these persons, up to death. So you can sing anything, it is dangerous only for ordinary citizens. Real life eludes us. Everything we see is an illusion.
                  2. +4
                    20 February 2022 18: 40
                    Terrible. For the mentioned persons.
                    "Perhaps you are sure that all this is complete nonsense,
                    What the hell if not? What will happen if not?
                    You will say: “This will never happen to us!”
                    What the hell if yes? Like this once - and yes?" (C)
                    1. +1
                      20 February 2022 20: 25
                      Handsomely...
                      I wanted to write "But the heads of kings have not been chopped off for a long time." Then she thought well and shuddered, remembering Gaddafi and Hussein (this one was taken from ... well, you yourself know where it was taken from, I don’t want to say it). In general, I am against cruelty, this is not my method. wassat )))
                    2. +1
                      20 February 2022 20: 38
                      My poet, I wonder where you get quotes from. And this one is right on topic.
                      1. +1
                        20 February 2022 20: 41
                        My Beautiful Stranger, it's just Slepakov, composition "Oil"
                      2. +1
                        20 February 2022 20: 58
                        I don’t believe that ALL of your quotes are from Slepakov. By the way, I don't know him. I don't know modern poets at all
                      3. +1
                        20 February 2022 21: 04
                        This quote by Slepakov is the first one in my comments on this resource.
                      4. +1
                        20 February 2022 21: 07
                        Slepakov is not a poet, he is a couplet player. Although Francois Villon is also difficult to call a poet....
  5. +4
    20 February 2022 10: 35
    It is not clear how Napoleon, who is well versed in people, could himself foster this "Fifth Column". After all, Marmon is just the tip of the iceberg.
    Perhaps Napoleon lacked something in character that Joseph Stalin had in abundance. fellow
    1. +3
      20 February 2022 10: 48
      Good morning, Eugene! )))
      But Napoleon had no other marshals. And here we must understand that a person has one life, and each of the marshals implemented his life program in the circumstances offered. Both Napoleon and the marshals are victims of the historical necessity of the formation of capitalism. The time of empires, like the time of unlimited monarchy, is already gone. Because history has ground them all - and Napoleon, and his marshals, and the Bourbons. It just doesn't get done quickly. Historical meat grinder running slowly wassat )))
      1. +3
        20 February 2022 11: 06
        Hello, Lyudmila Yakovlevna!
        But Napoleon had no other marshals

        There are always people. Who knew these marshals in the early 1790s? None. Napoleon had exactly the same "unknown marshals" at hand both in the XNUMXs and in the XNUMXs. But, he did not dare to update his elite. And lost.
        1. +4
          20 February 2022 12: 26
          Napoleon had exactly the same "unknown marshals" at hand both in the XNUMXs and in the XNUMXs. But, he did not dare to update his elite. And lost.

          How do you decide to change them? Napoleon saw perfectly well that if he replaced someone, the replaced would immediately become an enemy, moreover, a skilled enemy, with a military talent of one degree or another, who knows the Napoleonic military "kitchen" from the inside, having connections with the unreplaced marshals. Change and get a sickly enemy. But, of course, it could be changed. However, apparently, Napoleon exaggerated his abilities as a chess grandmaster.
          1. +3
            20 February 2022 12: 32
            How do you decide to change them?

            I agree, it's not an easy task. But, as they say, "took up the tug, do not say that it is not hefty." If an unknown native of Corsica climbed to the very top of the state pyramid and became Emperor Napoleon, then he must be able to solve such issues.
            1. +5
              20 February 2022 13: 43
              This means that he must be able to solve such problems.

              When you decide on something, you hardly know in advance what exactly you will have to decide. wassat )))
      2. +5
        20 February 2022 11: 54
        "the time of empires, as well as unlimited monarchy, has already passed" Lyudmila Yakovlevna, greetings. I agree and disagree with you: 1) unlimited monarchy times : Louis The sun has already gone that's right.
        2"authoritarian empires" are eternal. Adjusted for mentality, education. This is Bonoparte, and Stalin and Franco.
        It doesn't matter what it's called: emperor, 1 secretary, cuadillo. A person, to the extent of his character and mind, exalts his state.
        Another thing is that such persons are "piece goods". And here the aphorism is appropriate: "history is made by individuals"
        1. +1
          20 February 2022 19: 15
          Do not do. The role of a single subject, against the background of historical processes, is insignificant! In other words: there would be no Alexander the Great, but there would be Vasya Personike.
        2. 0
          20 February 2022 21: 03
          "history is made by individuals" is not quite right: Karamzin says: "sovereigns make history"
    2. +4
      20 February 2022 10: 49
      Perhaps Napoleon lacked something in character that Joseph Stalin had in abundance.

      He did not have his Lawrence, and Fouche could not pull it off. wink (joke)

      Hi Zhenya! drinks
      1. +3
        20 February 2022 11: 01
        Hello, Konstantin.
        ! hi
        Yes, "special departments" would not interfere with Napoleon.
        Many marshals have been reborn. They had to be removed from their posts in a timely manner and sent to the estates to breed chickens. To put forward new ones, hungry for honors, to the vacant seats.
        1. +4
          20 February 2022 11: 08
          Many marshals have been reborn.


          Or maybe they are just tired of the endless war, after all, everything has its own tensile strength, people too, especially since they are all very different.
          1. +4
            20 February 2022 11: 12
            Or maybe they are just tired of the endless war, because everything has its own tensile strength

            Absolutely.
            This is a natural property of human nature. And the Supreme Leader had to keep track of these moments of "fatigue" and change subordinates in time. Napoleon did not dare.
            1. +4
              20 February 2022 11: 26
              This was exacerbated by the length of communications. When you found out about what is happening in Russia, being in the Pyrenees, and vice versa. I still wonder how Napoleon was able to hold out for so long almost without getting out of the fighting.
              As always, people are ruined by the lack of a sense of proportion.
      2. +5
        20 February 2022 11: 24
        Kostya, actually with Lavrenty, not everything is simple.
        By the way, for Valery a new topic: from Malyuta Skuratov to Yuri Vladimirovich, the history of the "first gendarme".
        The topic is interesting and just for Valery: he knows how to generalize and tell in a fascinating way
        1. +4
          20 February 2022 11: 27
          And who says that everything is simple with Lavrenty? Not me. drinks
    3. +1
      20 February 2022 11: 09
      "Joseph Staline" such as Stalin cannot supply piece goods. So call.
      1. +4
        20 February 2022 11: 22
        Glory that Joseph Stalin, that Napoleon Bonaparte - "piece goods", to put it in your language, but I think both of them would be unpleasant such a comparison. request
        1. +3
          20 February 2022 11: 59
          It all depends on how you compare.
          1. +3
            20 February 2022 12: 09
            And no matter how you compare, they took their place in history, and they are commemorated to this day.
            1. +2
              20 February 2022 13: 47
              I do not argue. They have all made their name in history.
              Good or bad is another question
    4. +2
      20 February 2022 18: 49
      Loneliness is the fate of any authoritarian leader. The misanthropic character decides the fate of the immediate environment and determines the course of history. locally and temporarily.
      1. +3
        20 February 2022 19: 19
        Hello Anton.
        I've already been taken over by something else. It turns out that Marmon is a very versatile person. I would even compare him with Potemkin, only the scale is much smaller. What Marmont did not do at home in Châtillon after 15 years. And livestock, and viticulture, the production of tiles, a mill, and of course, metallurgy. He introduced the latest English innovations at the factory in Saint-Colombes-sur-Seine.
        I would say that a person's biography began after the age of 15.
        1. +2
          20 February 2022 19: 48
          Hello, Eugene!
          It happens. Throughout the history of mankind, a military career is just a way to reach an opportunity, to take up a hobby. By and large, the vast majority of human beings in this continuum cannot realize their personal abilities. Hence the problems.
          1. +3
            20 February 2022 19: 58
            Agree, Anton.
            a military career is just a way to achieve an opportunity, to take up a hobby

            Many retired high-ranking military officials lived quietly, at most they "bred chickens." And Marmont has scale. It was unfortunate for him that Châtillon's activities were limited. He would have "Novorossia", that's where a person would turn around ...
            By the way, maybe it was not in vain that Napoleon at the coronation ceremony determined a place for Marmont among the highest civil officials. So I saw talent. And Marmon was offended ...
            1. +3
              20 February 2022 20: 02
              Ambition, fuck them! Mutual ambition!
              1. +4
                20 February 2022 20: 07
                Yes, ambition...
                I don't know why, but the sphere of civil activity (I'm not sure what the correct definition is) is considered to be, as it were, lower than the military one. But Ivan Andreevich Krylov wrote a good fable about this, called "Sails and Cannons".
                1. +3
                  20 February 2022 20: 16
                  Ivan Andreevich was obese, lazy and prone to sybaritism. Which is convenient and carried out in the Olenin estate.
                  1. +3
                    20 February 2022 20: 19
                    I read that the passion for food simply consumed him. Up to manipulation with the body to eat even more. But, he remembered us, the descendants, not this. And with his literary work, for which we are grateful to him good
                    1. +2
                      21 February 2022 07: 10
                      Actually, Ivan Andreevich is not so much a fabulist, but a brilliant translator of fables
                      1. +1
                        21 February 2022 10: 45
                        Good morning, Svyatoslav!
                        Both the translator and the plots are the same, but he composed a lot himself.
                      2. +1
                        21 February 2022 13: 37
                        Yes, he took a certain plot, and then went far from the original
                      3. 0
                        21 February 2022 15: 20
                        "You are gray, and I, buddy, are gray,
                        And I have known your wolf nature for a long time ... "- the poor French did not know what would serve as an inspiration to Ivan Andreevich lol
  6. +4
    20 February 2022 11: 03
    Valery, last time I read your story and wanted to say: "with such friends you don't need enemies." Something distracted, but today he said
    1. +2
      20 February 2022 12: 07
      Kostya, Svyatoslav and Evgeny, I answered everyone with a comment below - about Stalin and Beria.
  7. +4
    20 February 2022 11: 08
    We approach the relationship of these people with the ethics and morality of today. 200 years ago, feudal traditions were still strong in the Suzerain-Vassal relations. Vassal dependence determined relations in both directions. We serve you as long as you, overlord, fulfill your obligations, give us money, prey, power, protection from others, maintain balance and legitimacy in your "pack". If not, then I'm sorry, let's go on a free voyage to look for a new owner. Napoleon understood this, so he generously gave both money and power for his service. But if you lose, you lose everything.
  8. 0
    20 February 2022 12: 00
    He did not have his Lawrence, and Fouche could not pull it off.

    Perhaps you are right, Kostya.
    Here is a book by Meshcheryakov "Stalin and the military conspiracy of 41".
    This book goes into great detail about the following.
    In 1938, intensive preparations began in the USSR for a war with Nazi Germany, which was openly announced to the Soviet people. Labor legislation was tightened, propaganda was intensified, a Defense Committee was created, headed by the Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars, to which, in the event of a war, all power was transferred. In 1940, in the fall, a document on mobilization work and planning was adopted by a joint resolution of the Council of People's Commissars and the Politburo, which, in fact, mind you, was ignored by the General Staff - surprising, right? On May 7, 41, Stalin was appointed Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars and the Defense Committee. In the second half of May, the troops receive a directive from the General Staff to bring the troops to an increased degree of combat readiness, in early June - a new directive on the next stage of increasing combat readiness, from May 14 to 18 - to full combat readiness, which means a state of war. But!
    However, despite all this, starting from the second half of June 18, 1941, the People's Commissar of Defense Timoshenko and the Chief of the General Staff Zhukov massively called the headquarters of the districts and orally - orally! - allegedly, according to Stalin's instructions, they demand to cancel the directives previously sent to them and prohibit retaliatory actions in the event of a "provocation" by the Germans. And then the Decree appears on the creation of the headquarters of the main command, headed by Timoshenko, deputy Zhukov, which actually leads to the abolition of the previously created Defense Committee, headed by the chairman of the Council of People's Commissars, which now was Stalin. What an attempt at a coup! How else to call it? Stalin was actually removed from defense control, and no one saw him from June 19 to June 25. Eyewitnesses said that from June 22 to June 25, employees in the people's commissariats and embassies did not know what to do, since no instructions were received, no one answered requests, and only from June 26 the work of people's commissariats and embassies resumed. And this happened because from June 25, Stalin, trying to clarify the situation in the People's Commissariat of Defense by phone, could not do this, the answers were slurred ...
    And then Stalin, taking Beria with him, personally appeared to Timoshenko, but there Zhukov sent him three letters. After that, Stalin left for the dacha, which became his personal headquarters, and work began to boil at the dacha. Within a short time, a joint plenum of the Central Committee and the Armed Forces was organized, restoring all the previous directives, and a State Defense Committee headed by Stalin was created, and Timoshenko and Zhukov were driven from their posts. And therefore, only on July 3 did Stalin's appeal to the people follow ...

    What's it like? They are marshals. They are always like that. And if Stalin did not have Beria? With his authority? Maybe then the story went differently. Napoleon definitely did not have his own Beria.
    1. +2
      20 February 2022 12: 26
      Wow, Lyudmila Yakovlevna!
      How did you approach the topic? good
      I meant that if the "leader" (marshal, high state official) stops "catching mice", then he should be removed from office, regardless of past merits. He can continue his life as a private person (especially since all the marshals were millionaires, landowners, had luxurious hotels in Paris). But such a person should no longer have influence on the military mechanism, on the state apparatus.
      1. +2
        20 February 2022 12: 44
        The measures you are talking about are good and effective in peacetime. Napoleon did not have peacetime, Napoleon had war. This is just the case when once the selected horse is not changed at the crossing. The one who failed can only be transferred to the wagon train to pull the cart. Or send for a while to graze on the grass. But at the same time, keep an eye on it so that it does not gallop to the enemy, thereby strengthening his army. But the horse's thoughts are unreadable - that's the thing!
        1. 0
          20 February 2022 13: 00
          Maybe so...
          "Only Caesars can judge Caesars"
          And not modest button presses on VO (this is me to myself) wassat
          1. +1
            20 February 2022 14: 01
            And what is there to be modest! wassat )))
            Remember the episode with the Red Building in the Strugatskys' City Doomed. The great strategist, playing marshals like chess pieces, cut off heads. And at the end of his life (this is already out of the book), the survivors gave him the opportunity to die, no one came up! But there is a difference. Stalin fought with opponents for the sake of the emaciated, crushed by all the sorrows of Van's life. And our current "strategists" perceive us as a washcloth that needs to be squeezed out and thrown away if it turns out to be very full of holes. And, by the way, after the death of the USSR, this is a global trend.
            And Napoleon? Purely selfish motives, for which he did not even squeeze, he was ready to throw the French nation into the furnace of history. And so it happened, and we talked about it. The birth rate in France never recovered during the 19th century.
            1. +3
              20 February 2022 14: 11
              And Napoleon? Purely selfish motives, for which he did not even squeeze, he was ready to throw the French nation into the furnace of history. And so it happened, and we talked about it. The birth rate in France never recovered during the 19th century.

              Somewhere I read that it is better for the common people when the throne is occupied by mediocrity, and not by an outstanding person. Less shock. winked
    2. +2
      20 February 2022 14: 37
      Lyudmila Yakovlevna, I didn’t read Meshcheryakov, but I did read Martirosyan. He reasonably raises the issue of treason in the highest echelon.
      Partially, the Kremlin touches on this issue
    3. +1
      20 February 2022 15: 27
      "taking Beria with him," in fact, then there were 3 people with Stalin
      1. +1
        20 February 2022 15: 56
        Only Beria was significant in solving the problem. No one dared to deprive him of his powers. Don't dare.
        1. +1
          20 February 2022 16: 54
          In fact, at that time, no one encroached on his powers.
    4. +2
      20 February 2022 16: 26
      "from 19 - 25 no one saw him" if not read: Molotov, Zhukov, Mikoyan, Beria, Voroshilov, Kaganovich, Voznesensky.
      There is a journal where the guards recorded everyone entering Stalin's office. And there it is recorded who and at what time came: from June 19 to June 25 ..
      My advice: look for "Beria's Diaries", there are on the net, the Kremlin, admirals Kuznetsov, Alfuzov.
      Meshcheryakov is a journalist's opportunist: he caught an increase in interest in Stalin and hurried to report with a sensation.
      Volkogonov, despite the bias, and even then it is preferable
      PS. There is something in this: read an anti-Stalinist and compare with documents and memoirs of others
  9. +1
    20 February 2022 13: 08
    I wish you all good health.
    Valery, I read something about Mormon, but you told it more interesting and in more detail.
    To some extent, Marmont's guilt can be shared with Joseph and Clerk: they instructed him to enter into negotiations, but they themselves fled. So that the descendants of Mormon have the right to sue those: they contributed to treason, but they themselves hid in the bushes. Probably preening there?
  10. +1
    20 February 2022 13: 34
    Valery, specify the following details: 1) is it true that there are no monuments to Marmont in France?
    2) What is the reason that Mormon became such an avid traveler? After all, there must be some reasons: fears for my life, envious people deprived of their native shelter, made a vow to the Lord?
    1. VLR
      +3
      20 February 2022 14: 02
      I have not heard about the monuments to Marmont. But he “travelled” involuntarily: he had to leave France, he didn’t find himself particularly needed anywhere, and why would the governments of other countries complicate relations with the new French authorities because of him?
      1. 0
        20 February 2022 18: 18
        "to complicate with the new French authorities" i.e. Louis Philippe hinted: do not want to see him?
        In this case, Alexander 1, and then Nicholas 1 were kinder: check your estate or else, as he said, and the nobleman goes to his village. And here it is worse: exile and not exile
        1. VLR
          +1
          20 February 2022 18: 29
          Nicholas I did not send his opponents (Decembrists) to the estates smile
          And those poor fellows just stood there, stood all day on the square, not knowing what to do and where to go (Alyoshka Orlov or Leonty Benigsen were not among them - they would have prompted). And Marmont acted very harshly, trying to suppress the uprising that brought Louis Philippe to power.
          1. 0
            20 February 2022 18: 57
            Valery, 1) among the Decembrists were different: Lunev, von Wiesen, Pestel. Pushchin, walked his daughter to the side. In general, when you watch: "The Star of Captivating Happiness" and read the details about them. Not the most decent characters.
            2) You wrote: "Marmont was inactive for a long time", he probably hesitated what to do?
            1. VLR
              +1
              20 February 2022 19: 05
              Yes, Karl, in the end, threw a tantrum: they say, you want to betray and sell me, like Bonaparte
              1. 0
                20 February 2022 19: 17
                Valery, I don’t fucking know those events.
                Piggy, too, except for individual names and dates, knows nothing!
    2. 0
      20 February 2022 18: 22
      I heard that in France there are boulevards of Napoleon's marshals, but Mormon is not there.
  11. +1
    20 February 2022 13: 42
    Quote: Sea Cat
    But Paris was saved.


    "Paris is worth a mass." (c)))

    The words of Henry of Navarre when he converted to Catholicism
  12. The comment was deleted.
    1. 0
      20 February 2022 17: 19
      "perfect hamsters" Vic Nick. YOU, as always, are pulling the pins so that the author does not skid.
    2. VLR
      +4
      20 February 2022 18: 36
      Viktor Nikolaevich, it's still not worth insulting people out of the blue and calling them "hamsters". It's kind of ugly.
      1. +1
        20 February 2022 19: 12
        And I didn't mean to offend anyone.
  13. +1
    20 February 2022 18: 09
    Colleagues, Valery, good evening.
    Do you hesitate to come here or not? The topic is not very interesting to me.
    Valery, I have a question not entirely in the subject:
    Les Invalides, what is it and when did it appear?
    1. VLR
      +2
      20 February 2022 18: 19
      Louis XIV ordered to build it for the "charity of lonely veterans" - who had nowhere to go. The scale is impressive - at first 6 thousand people lived, then - 4 thousand. At the same time, they were divided into companies, the army daily routine was preserved, and so that life did not seem like honey, they worked during the day: shoe shops, a tapestry workshop, even an engraving coloring shop. Gradually, museums of military subjects began to be placed in the barracks of the disabled (the first - back in 1777). Now here is the richest museum of the Army (I was in it), but 100 veterans still live.
      1. +1
        20 February 2022 18: 27
        Bonaparte is also buried there. An interesting combination: a museum, a shelter for the lonely and an honorary cemetery, after all, Charles de Gaulle is also buried there?
        1. VLR
          +3
          20 February 2022 18: 34
          Napoleon, his legitimate son and two brothers, Rouger de Lille (the author of the Marseillaise), some marshals of Bonaparte, Ferdinand Foch, and some others are buried in the cathedral of Les Invalides. But de Gaulle is buried in Colombes-les-Deux-Eglises
          By the way, Pear's heart, about which in the next article, is also there.
          1. 0
            20 February 2022 19: 54
            And what were they guided by when they decided who to bury?
            Okay, the author of the Marseillaise, the son of Napoleon, and what kind of hangover are his brothers from? Then already Napoleon3 and his relatives
          2. VLR
            +2
            21 February 2022 05: 34
            Pear's Heart - in the Cathedral of the House of Invalides (otherwise it was not entirely clear in the previous message)
        2. +3
          20 February 2022 19: 04
          Bonaparte is also buried there.
          And how buried!




          Moreover, there is no oppressive feeling of the grave - on the contrary, everything is flooded with light (from the openwork dome) and a feeling of elevation reigns.
          1. +3
            20 February 2022 19: 15
            Marshal Foch is also buried there.


            And it is also light, only the dome is smaller.
            And De Gaulle, by the way, in an inconspicuous (relatively) grave in the department of Haute-Marne, in the cemetery of Colombey-les-Deux-Églises.