1809 a campaign which started promisingly and turned into a disaster...

[Count von Csollich]

If there's anyone interested to talk about this please do so:

To start off I'd have two questions:

1)A rather unknown one first: At the battle of Abensberg on the 20.04.1809 the Austrian 6th Corps engaged the French Avant Guard and after a day-lasting struggle was able to hold their ground (until recalled by the Generalissimo Charles...) Those are the facts, BUT I've read that during the night the Austrians were able to listen to several "VIVE" cries (and I haven't read anything about the addition of ..."l'empereur"!) could it really have been possible that Napoleon himslelf was present that day, or had arrived in the evening as things weren't going as planned?

2)The obvious question, but still I couldn't find a definitive answer for myself:
Would the interference of John's additional 30000 or so troops have made any difference at Wagram? As they would have arrived from the north they would have first come in contact with the Austrian right wing and not the left wing under pressure from Davout... and sending them halfway across the battlefield without Napoleon observing would rather have been impossible? (he might have commited the Guard in order to slow the joining of Rosenberg with John...)

[Count von Csollich]

...ok...It was worth a try...

[Pariente]

Je ne pense pas que la campagne de 1809 fût un désastre ; le traité de Schönbrunn a conduit à la perte par l'Autriche du Tyrol, de Salzbourg, de Trieste et de la Dalmatie au bénéfice de la France et de ses alliés. De surcroît, l'Autriche dut payer une énorme indemnité de guerre.

J'ai toujours pensé que Napoléon était à la tête des troupes françaises à Abensberg...
_________________________________________________________________________________

I don't think the 1809 campaign was a disaster as the treaty of Schönbrunn had led to Austria's loss of Tyrol, Salzburg, Trieste and Dalmatia in favor of France and its allies. Moreover Austria had to pay a huge indemnity.

I always thought Napoléon led the French forces at Abensberg...

[Count von Csollich]

I don't think the 1809 campaign was a disaster as the treaty of Schönbrunn had led to Austria's loss of Tyrol, Salzburg, Trieste and Dalmatia in favor of France and its allies. Moreover Austria had to pay a huge indemnity.

I always thought Napoléon led the French forces at Abensberg...

So for myself...being an Austrian IT DID turn into disaster... (though as a historian, who adors the french Army much more than the Austrian one, I'm happy that it did...)

As to Abensberg...funny thing that you say that...because according to my knowledge the Austrians put up a good fight that day and only retreated the next day as the overall position was hopeless... (my ancestor led as chief of staff of the 6th corps a birgade-strength charge on the french right from the front - with success...that's why I'm so interested if the Emperor himself was present...


and after all
THANK YOU VERY MUCH for the answer..."mon Colonel"  - merci beaucoup!!

[Broadsword]

If Archduke Charles had just moved a bit more swiftly and decisively in April, he might easily have destroyed the outnumbered French corps, giving him the chance to seize and hold the initiative for the rest of the campaign. The fun thing about wargames: You, as the Coalition player, don't need to be as cautious as Charles. And, unlike Charles, you know just how superior your forces are at the start of the war. So you can play the 1809 campaign (using a campaign game + LG for the battles) and have it take place on much more even terms than happened historically.

[Count von Csollich]

But Austria was just not ready for war, as Charles always urged the "Kriegsrat" to wait...
one perfect example would be the battle around Linz... 2 days the Austrians camped there, with no rations being supplied to the troops...they had to starve in their own home country, because some arrogant town council refused to distribute the rations without proper payment... that being said... a few days later the french took the entire, fully supplied, depot without paying anything...

As to replaying history...although I would always stand up for Austria in any MP battle I'd like to command the french side as well. One simple reason: Well known and glorious unit's names... (austria didn't even have a Guard...)  

[lodi57]

20th Arpil, in the outlet of Abensberg, it is not the main part of the Austrian army that Napoleon is going to meet, but his left wing consisted of 5th corp of the archduke Louis, the 2nd reserve corp of Kienmayer and the 6th of Hiller (placed in Mainburg is partialy engage late in the day) arranged respectively from north to south. Troops under the archduke Louis, displayed on 14 km, between Siegenburg and Bachel, go taken the shock of the French masses. The corp of Lannes, division Morand in the lead is going to collide Thierry et Schustek brigades, which are chased away from the wood and the village of Bachel and are going be cut to pieces by the light cavalry of Jacquinot and the heavies of Saint-Sulpice ; in their attempt of escape towards Rohr village the survivors will be dislodged by an front and flank attack  executed by 13th light, 30th and 17th of line. Decimated, in spite of the brave charges of Austrian hussars and dragoons to help them, the foot soldiers of Thierry and Schustek manage to withdraw on Rottenburg, having lost near 5000 men. General Thierry is taken prisoner. In the center, the Bavarians throw back the troops of Bianchi on those of Reuss. After several successive assaults, they get a foothold on the heights of Kirchdorf. The decision is definitively made when the troops of Vandamme attacked on the Austrian right and seize the village of Berka. More in the South, von Wrède push knock down the troops of the archduke Louis. This last one decides to withdraw towards the corp of Hiller. All the Austrian left, the 2nd, 5th and 6th corps, under a hard pressure have to retreat on Landshut at night. Napoleon was at 7.00 am with the Bavarians in the center and stay with them all day long. He was at Rohr at 8.30 pm.

[HarryInk]

Good questions that I'll hmmm and humm over when I return from holidays this weekend.  Napoleon was leading @ Abensburg, no?  I'm just reading the 20th in John Gill's nifty 'thunder on the danube'.  He presents the Austrian high command as baulking at the first hurdle (Teugn-Hausen).  Is it possible they marched to war with a thin veneer of hope that realised on that first day what a fragile instrument the Hauptarmee was, off the marchfeld?

[Count von Csollich]

Mon General Lodi57 merci beaucoup de ce reponse (was this correct french???)
When I was talking about the brave Austrians, I ment the 6th corps...The way it is written and accounted for in the Austrian Relation in the War archives is that Hiller decided to support the troops of Thiery and Schustek, although he and his troops were very tired...before he arrives on the field Hiller is told that he is already too late and Archduke Ludwig decides to retreat because the french cavalry is in close pursuit...In the ealry afternoon Hiller then sends both his brigades, Hofmeister and Weissenwolf without a break to attack the village of Patzdorf and Rottenburg in order to retake the chaussee... the charge was successful...soon afterwards the french counterattack with a huge numerical advantage and things seem to be getting very bad...This counterattack can only be held off by a decisive charge of the Weissenwolf brigade on the French right, main effort by the regiments Kerpen and Deutschmeister...The French defend themselves skillfully and the fighting comes to a stall...With the support of the regiments Spleny and Benjovsky and with support of the Rosenberg Chevaux legers (Command FML Vincent) the Austrians are finally able to hold the chaussee...During the night eventually Hiller decides that a withdrawal is inevitable because of the great numerical advantage of the French...Losses of the Austrians on the left wing are listed as 25 Officers, 467 men dead and 63 Officers and 2119 men wounded, furthermore around 4000 men prisoner... also 3000 French are accounted to have been taken prisoner during the day's action...

So the counterattack of the Weissenwolf brigade was actually the only successful austrian operation of the whole day... Charles waits for the 5th Corps to arrive but this never happens and a s a result the attack on Davout doesn't have the necessary numerical advantage...

[Broadsword]

That's true, Harry. It's easy for we gamers to say, in hindsight, to say "if only..." But the battlefield wasn't Charles' only concern. The Hauptarmee was the guarantor of the Habsburg state and dynasty. So that always made the Austrians more cautious, more reluctant to risk all on a single decisive battle. When things got dicey, they preferred to lose, withdraw, and survive to fight another day, than to risk what it would take to win big. Interesting implications for wargaming, too: It's fun to play the "what if..." and "if only..." hypotheticals, but for a historical campaign to be realistic, a game would have to simulate this built-in Austrian caution somehow.   

[Count von Csollich]

but for a historical campaign to be realistic, a game would have to simulate this built-in Austrian caution somehow.   

A different kind of caution can be seen in the austrian commanders as very few of them would have had the initiative and the charisma of Mareshals like Lannes or Davout... They were all aristocrats with an "old school" war doctrine ( the new system wasn't fully implemented and definitely not tested yet) so they would have always waited until all was properly ordered and positioned and then would have made a "courageous" attempt to dislodge the enemy with the obvious result...Maybe only Liechtenstein showed some of this "perfect timeing" and had the skill to retake the initiative in the heat of battle...

With your and HarryInk's statement about Archduke Charles and the Austrian war policy you're absolutely right...a way of dealing with war not only seen in the Napoleonic era...
Back to "what if...": If only his brother had listened to Archduke Charles, everything WOULD HAVE PROBABLY BEEN differently, it MIGHT have been