We are searching data for your request:
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.
Battle of Vauchamps, 14 February 1814
The battle of Vauchamps (14 February 1814) was the last French victory during Napoleon's 'Six Days campaign', and saw the French defeat Blucher's attempt to block their path south towards Schwarzenberg's Army of Bohemia, which was advancing on the Seine front.
The first phase of the 1814 campaign hadn't gone well for the French. Napoleon's attempts to prevent Blucher's Army of Silesia and Schwarzenberg's Army of Bohemia from uniting failed, and even exposed the French to an attack by a large part of the combined Allied army (battle of La Rothiere, 1 February 1814). Napoleon managed to escape from this trap, but the Allies had united their armies, and won a victory over Napoleon on his own soil.
In the aftermath of La Rothiere the French retreated to Troyes, and then to Nogent, which Napoleon believed to be Blucher's next target. Instead the Allies had decided to split, with Schwarzenberg advancing along the Seine to pin Napoleon down, while Blucher moved north to the Marne to threaten Paris.
As a result a gap opened up between the Allied armies, and Blucher also allowed gaps to open up between the main components of his own force. This give Napoleon a chance to defeat Blucher's army in detail, and he took it. He advanced north from Nogent and defeated an isolated Russian corps at Champaubert (10 February 1814), before turning west to defeat Sacken and part of Yorck's corps at Montmirail (11 February 1814). Unfortunately for Napoleon Marshal Macdonald had failed to block the crucial bridge over the Marne at Chateau-Thierry, and the retreating Allies were able to escape across the Marne. The battle of Chateau-Thierry (12 February 1814) was thus just a rearguard action.
In the meantime Schwarzenberg was advancing down the Seine, and the troops Napoleon had left in the south to dely him were being forced to retreat. On 13 February the French got a bridge over the Marne and Mortier and part of the cavalry were able to resume the pursuit of Sacken and Yorck. Napoleon returned to Montmirial to prepare to move south, and Macdonald and Kellermann were sent ahead to try and restore the situation. Marmont, who had been left to watch Blucher after the battle of Champaubert, conducted a skilful fighting retreat from Vertus.
Napoleon had Friant's 1st Old Guard Division, Saint-Germain's cavalry, the Guard Cavalry and Marshal Ney at Montmirail, as well as Marmont's retreating forces. General Grouchy was given overall command of the cavalry.
On 14 February Blucher had around 21,000 infantry and 8,400 cavalry, and Napoleon 15,000 infantry and 7,000 cavalry. Another French infantry division was approaching from the south, and worried Blucher, but was too far away to take part in the battle. At the start of the day the Prussians held the village of Vauchamps, one mile to the east of Montmirail.
The French attacked first. General Ricard was ordered to attack the village, while part of the French cavalry prepared to support him from the north. The French soon forced back the most advanced Prussian troops, and in response the main Allied army began to advance from its position at Fromentieres, east of Vauchamps. Kleist's corps was on the Allied right (north of the road), with Kapsevich on the left (south). These Allied reinforcements join up with the defenders of Vauchamps and forced Ricard to retreat. The French threw their cavalry into the battle, and the defenders of Vauchamps were forced to retreat towards the rest of Kleist's and Kapsevich's men.
The French now began a general advance, with Ricard on the left, Lagrange on the right and the Young Guard and Old Guard just behind. Grouchy's cavalry was still operating to the north of the main battlefield, and threatened to cut off any Allied retreat.
By about 2pm Blucher realised that his position was in great danger and ordered a retreat. Grouchy's cavalry harassed his right flanks, inflicting heavy casualties, and then managed to get onto the road east of the Allies, blocking their escape route to Etoges. All the French needed to make their success complete was to get their horse artillery into place, but the muddy conditions prevented them from achieving this, and after a hard fight Blucher was able to get past Grouchy's road block before the French infantry could hit him in the rear.
By the end of the fighting the Allies had lost around 6,000 men (equally split between the Russians and Prussians), and the French only 600. Most of the Allied losses had occurred during the cavalry attacks on the retreating Allied army. Blucher then retreated further east to Chalons, opening up a big gap between the two Allied armies. At first Napoleon considered attacking Blucher once again, but the news from the Seine remained bad, and he was forced to turn south to deal with Schwarzenberg. Once again Napoleon was able to force his direct opponent to retreat, in this case after winning victories at Mormant (17 February 1814), Valjouen (17 February 1814) and Montereau (18 February 1814).
In the long term Napoleon didn't gain much from his victory. Blucher was retreating towards reinforcements, and he was given command of troops from the Army of the North. He soon collected Winzingerode's 30,000 men and these made up for the loses he had suffered during the Six Days, and by the start of March Blucher was ready to move west once again. Once again Napoleon would be forced to abandon a campaign against Schwarzenberg and rush north to try and stop Blucher once again. This time he would be less successful, and the battles of Craonne and Laon would end with the French retreating.
Napoleonic Home Page | Books on the Napoleonic Wars | Subject Index: Napoleonic Wars
Vauchamps - 14 February 1814
The Battle of Vauchamps was the final major engagement of Napoleon’s Six Days Campaign. On 13 February, reeling from his three successive defeats, Blücher looked to disengage from Napoleon and instead manoeuvre with part of his forces to fall upon the isolated Corps of Marshal Marmont and regain the initiative. Napoleon anticipated Blücher’s move and had himself moved to support Marmont. On the morning of the 14th Marmont continued to fall back, but counter-attacked once Napoleon arrived. With French resistance stiffening, Blücher realized that he now was facing the Emperor and decided belatedly to pull back. Blücher’s attempt to disengage, however, proved extremely difficult, as the Allied force was in an advanced position and had virtually no cavalry present to cover the retreat. While the actual battle for Vauchamps was short, the Allied forces suffered heavy losses when the French infantry, under Marshal Marmont, and most of all, the cavalry under Grouchy, launched a relentless pursuit. At nightfall, Blücher opted for an exhausting night march in order to take his remaining forces to safety.
The stage is set. The battle lines are drawn and you are in command. Can you change history?
Allied Army (Prussian, Russian)
• Commander: Blücher
• 5 Command Cards & 3 Iron Will Counters
• 3 Tactician Cards
• Commander: Napoleon
• 6 Command Cards
• 6 Tactician Cards
• Move First
• The French player gains 1 Temporary Victory Banner at the start of the turn for each town hex a French unit occupies (Temporary Victory Banner Turn Start)
• French line infantry units are conscripts and do not receive one additional die in melee when attacking an enemy infantry unit.
• The River Le Petit Morin is fordable.
• Pre-Battle Mother Russia Roll is not in effect.
• The French player gains 1 Victory Banner for each French cavalry unit the exit the battlefield from any hex on the Allied baseline.
In this scenario "Blücher" get only 3 Tactician Cards, in all other existing scenarios he get 5 TC´s. Is this a mistake in scenario notes or is it correct?
- Three is correct Blücher was in all kinds of trouble at Vauchamps.
(Richard Borg: 2015 - November - 01)
Talk:Battle of Vauchamps
The battle of Vauchamps was fought on February 14, 1814 between 30,000 Frenchmen under the command of Napoleon Bonaparte and 20,000 Prussian troops under the command of Field Marshal Gerhard Blucher.
Mashal Blucher marched torwards the town of Vauchamps, but ran into a french force under the French Marshal Marmount. The Prussians found themselves in a hard fight and took heavy losses before being pushed off the field by the French. Blucher then got word that Napoleon was nearby and was ready to reinforce Marmount. Moving Cavlary to trap the Germans, Marshal Grouchy (France) was slowed by boggy ground and most of the germans evaded capture.
Prussian losses were approx 7000 and French lost about 600 men.
Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:15, 9 March 2011 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Battle of Chateau-Thierry, (12 February 1814)
The third action of the Six Days campaign in eastern France, the Battle of Chateau-Thierry, resulted in a victory for Napoleon’s troops over the Prussians and Russians under generals Johann Graf Yorck von Wartenburg and Dmitry Osten-Sacken, respectively, as well as the continuation of French momentum against the Allied forces. Two days earlier, Yorck had captured Chateau-Thierry, and after the Allied defeat in the battles of Champaubert (10 February) and Montmirail (11 February), his forces had returned northward to Chateau-Thierry in their retreat. At the onset of the Six Days campaign, Napoleon had ordered Marshal Macdonald to pursue Yorck and recapture the city (to prevent an Allied retreat across the Marne), but Macdonald was unable to reach Chateau-Thierry before the Allies could cross the river and fortify themselves, much to Napoleon’s disappointment.
Napoleon himself and the majority of his troops, together with Mortier, pursued the retreating Allied forces from the battlefield at Montmirail to Chateau-Thierry, leaving Marshal Marmont in reserve at Vertus. He hoped to knock the forces of Yorck and Sacken out of the campaign before turning to confront Field Marshal Gebhard von Blücher leading the Army of Silesia (Russians and Prussians) and Feldmarschall Karl Fürst zu Schwarzenberg of the Army of Bohemia (mostly Austrians).
In the headlong flight to Chateau-Thierry, a French corps under Marshal Ney caught up with Yorck’s rear guard, broke the Allied cavalry line, captured a great deal of baggage, nine pieces of artillery, and two Russian infantry regiments on the Allied right. In the process the French also seized the hills overlooking the Marne. Although the Prussian infantry made a stand at Chateau-Thierry, it served little purpose save that of protecting their retreat across the Marne. The Allies lost some 3,000 troops (approximately 1,250 Prussians and 1,500 Russians) and the guns and baggage captured at the outset of the action, as well as their strategic position in the village, while the French lost only around 600 men.
Owing to lack of a pontoon train, Napoleon remained in Chateau-Thierry the evening of the battle while engineers repaired the bridge over the Marne. It was a mixed victory for Napoleon, however. He had won the day, but the surviving Allied troops escaped across the Marne beyond the river Ourcq, destroying the bridge behind them, and were poised to regroup. He left Marshal Mortier to continue the pursuit of Yorck and Osten-Sacken and planned to face the emerging threat from Schwarzenberg near the Seine. First, however, he decided to confront Blücher yet again, at Vauchamps.
The Battle of Chateau-Thierry highlighted the paradox of Napoleon’s efforts: He could win engagements with daring tactics and seasoned troops, but the discrepancy in numbers was beginning to tell, and soon there would be too many Allied forces to face. By the end of March the Allied troops had reached Paris.
References and further reading Chandler, David G. 1995. The Campaigns of Napoleon. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. Delderfield, R. F. 1968. Imperial Sunset: The Fall of Napoleon, 1813-14. Philadelphia: Chilton. Lawford, James. 1977. Napoleon: The Last Campaigns, 1813-1815. London: Roxby. Petre, F. Loraine. 1977. Napoleon at Bay: 1814. London: Arms and Armour.
Battle of Vauchamps, 14 February 1814 - History
1814 - Reeling from their disastrous defeat at Leipzig the previous year, Napoleon and his army crossed the Rhine back into France. The Emperor hoped this great river barrier would provide him sufficient time to raise a new army. But, just as the Marie Louises, as these conscripts were known, began to arrive at the front from their various staging areas, the Prussians, under their stalwart Prince Blücher, crossed that great river with surprising ease.
A second great Allied army under the command of Prince Schwarzenberg took a more southerly route. Scarcely had the new year turned before "On to Paris" could be heard cried out in a dozen different languages from soldiers in their tens of thousands filing down the two great parallel roads toward the French capital.
As incomplete as his preparations were, Napoleon gathered what troops he could and tried to forestall this mass. They met at Brienne (Jan. 29th). It was just a skirmish but the Emperor could claim success. This proved fleeting as the Allies consolidated their troops and overwhelmed the French at La Rothiere (Feb. 1st). For the Allies, however, this victory proved worse than a defeat would have, for they became over confident. Prince Blücher, deeming the road to Paris open, chose to ride pell-mell for the prize. Not only did his progress put ever increasing distance between himself and Schwarzenberg's force, but his own columns became strung out. Napoleon was quick to seize the opportunity this presented.
Leaving a small force to tie up Schwarzenberg, the Emperor turned north and struck the Prussians in the belly, crushing a corps at Champaubert (Feb. 10th). Before Blücher could even appraise the situation Napoleon hit him again winning the battle of Montmirail (Feb. 11th). And while Blücher frantically tried to regain his balance he was struck once more at Vauchamps (Feb. 14th). For a brief moment in February, 1814, Napoleon once again possessed the sacred spark. History has since remembered this time, calling it The Six Days of Glory.
6 Myths About the Battle of New Orleans
MYTH #1: The Battle of New Orleans was fought after the formal end of the War of 1812.
Contrary to popular belief, Great Britain and the United States were still officially in a state of war when they clashed in New Orleans. While British and American diplomats negotiating in Ghent, Belgium, agreed to a peace accord on Christmas Eve in 1814, the treaty stipulated that “orders shall be sent to the armies, squadrons, officers, subjects and citizens of the two powers to cease from all hostilities” only ter the ratifications of this treaty by both parties.” Great Britain ratified the Treaty of Ghent within days of its signing, but the document did not arrive in Washington, D.C., after its slow trans-Atlantic ship journey until February 14, 1815, more than a week after news of Jackson’s victory reached the capital. The U.S. Senate unanimously ratified the treaty on February 16, 1815, and President James Madison, displaced from the White House after its burning by the British, signed the agreement in his temporary home, the Octagon House. The exchange of ratified copies between the two countries then brought the War of 1812 to its official conclusion, more than a month after the Battle of New Orleans.
MYTH #2: The Battle of New Orleans was the final military engagement of the War of 1812.
While Jackson’s stunning victory was the last major battle of the War of 1812, it wasn’t the final time that British and American forces traded shots. Driven from New Orleans, the British fleet sailed east along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico and launched an amphibious assault on Fort Bowyer, which guarded the entrance to Mobile Bay. American forces inside the fort had repulsed a smaller British attack in September 1814 but could not withstand the larger onslaught that began on February 8, 1815. The fort’s commander surrendered three days later. Thirteen Redcoats died in the battle along with one American. British plans to seize the port city of Mobile were abandoned when news of the peace treaty finally arrived.
Painting of the battle by a member of the Louisiana militia
MYTH #3: The Battle of New Orleans was a one-day conflict.
The fight for New Orleans was actually a drawn-out affair that lasted more than a month. British ships first clashed with American gunboats on Lake Borgne near New Orleans on December 14, 1814. Three days before Christmas, British troops landed on the east side of the Mississippi River, and the following evening Jackson halted the Redcoats by ambushing them in their camp. The two sides dueled several times before British General Edward Pakenham ordered an all-out assault on Jackson’s heavily fortified position along the Rodriguez Canal on January 8, 1815. Even after suffering a calamitous defeat, the British continued to bombard Fort St. Philip near the mouth of the Mississippi River for more than a week and did not withdraw from the vicinity of New Orleans until January 18.
MYTH #4: The Battle of New Orleans was only fought on land.
Jackson’s exploits overshadowed the key roles played by the navies in the Battle of New Orleans. The fight in southern Louisiana was ultimately for control of the Mississippi River, the economic lifeline to the North American interior, and it was the Royal Navy under British Vice-Admiral Alexander Cochrane that managed the campaign against New Orleans. The British victory on Lake Borgne allowed the Redcoats to stage an amphibious landing that threw New Orleans into a panic and prompted Jackson to impose martial law in the city. British attempts to sail up the Mississippi River, however, were ultimately repulsed by American forces at Fort St. Philip.
MYTH #5: Kentucky riflemen were responsible for the American victory.
Days before the main battle on January 8, upwards of 2,000 untrained Kentucky militiamen arrived in New Orleans, ready to defend the city. Most of the poorly equipped riflemen, however, lacked an important accessory𠅊 rifle. Fighting with makeshift weapons, the Kentucky volunteers had little impact on the fight and even infuriated Jackson by taking flight in the midst of battle. “The Kentucky reinforcements, in whom so much reliance had been placed, ingloriously fled,” the general wrote the day after the battle, “thus yielding to the enemy that most formidable position.” Although cannon and artillery fire from the army regulars ultimately inflicted the most damage on the British forces, a popular 1821 song penned by Samuel Woodworth, “The Hunters of Kentucky,” rewrote history by exaggerating the role of the backcountry marksmen. Even though the tune lionized the fighting men Jackson once cursed, its popularity among his political supporters on the frontier persuaded “Old Hickory” to adopt it as his campaign song on his way to winning the White House in 1828.
MYTH #6: Pirate Jean Lafitte was a battlefield hero.
The French-born pirate and privateer Jean Lafitte plied the waters of Barataria Bay and the Gulf of Mexico in the early 1800s and remains a legendary figure in New Orleans. Courted by the British, Lafitte instead offered his services and weapons to Jackson in return for pardons for some of his men arrested by the United States. The Baratarian pirates composed only a small percentage of the American forces on January 8, but their experience manning cannons on privateering ships proved valuable along the artillery batteries. Lafitte was hailed as a hero in the war’s aftermath, but there is no evidence that he was anywhere near the front lines fighting alongside his men during the main battle.
The Great Captains of History - How Many Battles?
Okay but my other point was that if you only count engagements you end up with this:
A prolific campaigner like Selim apparently only fought five battles? This information becomes useless without the context. Because Selim campaigned many times, but didn't command more than five battles in person? Selim also campaigned against the Georgians and in Eastern Anatolia prior to becoming Sultan. I think that in the civil war he actually fought more than two battles. The taking of Tabriz, after Chaldiran, was also an important operation whether or not he fought much resistance. He also sweeped Anatolia of the Shia rebels, and in his campaigns against the Mamelukes there were multiple operations, which aren't included just because Selim didn't go to conduct that operation in person and entrusted it to one of his subordinates. Which this campaign was particularly notable because Selim also sent a column into Upper Mesopotamia to deal with the Safavids, to prevent them from joining with the Mamelukes, and to conquer that area of Upper Mesopotamia.
I'll assume that this is true, he only commanded 5 battles (although the actual number is probably closer to 8 I think), but how then is Subutai attributed with 100 battles? Do you really think that someone as fat as Subutai went to command 100 battles in person? Did Kutuzov even technically command a single battle on his own then? The entirety of the Ulm campaign, apparently Napoleon did not actually fight a single engagement. This criteria doesn't take into account varying levels of command. A high ranking commander isn't going to be involved in every engagement, it just isn't feasible. Yet despite being in charge of the operations, and planning the strategy, and making the decision to delegate to a subordinate to carry out a mission, the commander doesn't get the credit because they didn't go in person. I mean by that logic Moltke actually didn't command any battles, he was present and issued commands for maybe two of them.
Right here I am only criticizing the basic criteria, not the methodology itself. So making lists with basic data is fine, if not flawed. I basically did that with the Cao Cao chart. But including only those engagements which the general commanded himself is extremely flawed because then it opens this up to an argument of what constitutes an engagement, and what levels of command are we taking into account. For the record, if we take this criteria at face value, then no commander after 1870 could be given credit for any battle. All of those battles were fought by their subordinate Division commanders, Corps commanders, and then Army Commanders when that became common. The concept of an army becomes redundant because then you have things like the Army Group or the Theater Command (for example CENTCOM in the Iraq War, command for all the Middle East but the HQ is in Florida).
The thing is, this thread was never meant to be an accurate representation of ALLthe aspects of a commander's generalship, and no one views it as such.
We're just covering tactics, pure and simple (the thread is literally named 'How many Battles?'). So the picture that emerges from the stats is obviously a bizarre one but that doesn't mean it's unimportant. Skill in battle tactics is definitely an important asset for a commander, especially in the Ancient, Medieval and Early-Modern Eras. And this also serves a ton of other useful purposes Dibty covered here.
If you have a different methodology or want to cover operations and strategy too then you could start another thread. It would actually be quite helpful in covering the other metrics of generalship in singular detail.
Why Did Napoleon Lose the Battle of Waterloo?
At some point in your life, you've probably heard the expression "He met his Waterloo," meaning that the person in question had met a crushing defeat that ended his ambitions forever.
That's exactly what happened to Napoleon, near a village named Waterloo in Belgium June 18, 1815, when the 46-year-old French general-turned-emperor lost the climactic battle of his storied career at the hands of British and Prussian opponents. The battle ended Napoleon's attempt to make a comeback from exile, and ended the short-lived glories of France's First Empire.
Waterloo was a hard fall for a diminutive leader whose ego was so massive that at his coronation in 1804, he snatched a crown from the hands of the Pope and placed it on his own head. Napoleon was a master tactician who won more than 50 battles in his career, including a spectacular victory at Austerlitz (what's now Slavkov u Brna in the Czech Republic) in December 1805 that became a textbook example of daring tactics.
Napoleon's Military Mind
Facing a massive combined Russian-Austrian force that outnumbered his own army by 22,000 men, Napoleon deliberately weakened his right flank, luring the enemy into attacking him. It turned out to be a trap, as Napoleon counterattacked and cut the Russian-Austrian line in two. Twenty-six thousand enemy soldiers were killed, wounded or captured by the French. He was so successful that by 1812, he controlled most of the European continent with the exception of a handful of countries.
Napoleon's military dominance didn't last, in part because of his own hubris. He made what turned out to be a disastrous decision to invade Russia in 1812, but didn't prepare his troops for the harsh Russian winter, and ended up losing 300,000 of the 500,000 soldiers in his force. That was followed by a French defeat at the hands of British, Portuguese and Spanish forces in the Peninsular War in 1814. After British-led forces invaded France and seized Paris, Napoleon abdicated in April 1814, and was exiled to the Mediterranean island of Elba.
But less than a year later in February 1815, Napoleon escaped from Elba and returned to France. He issued a proclamation, calling for the French army to join in restoring him to power in the name of liberating France from foreign domination. "Victory shall march in double-quick time," he promised them. As the allies who opposed Napoleon gathered troops at France's borders, Napoleon struck first, leading his forces into Belgium with the plan of beating the opposing armies one at a time before they could coalesce against him.
Waterloo Was Doomed From the Start
"The first thing to bear in mind is that even had he been victorious at Waterloo, Napoleon would not have won the war," explains Tom Mockaitis. He's a professor of history at DePaul University, where he teaches courses in British, modern European and military history. Napoleon "faced a coalition consisting of Britain, Prussia, Russia, Austria and several smaller powers. Defeating Wellington would only have delayed the inevitable. With most of Europe ranged against him, defeat was only a matter of time."
Napoleon caught the Prussians by surprise, routing a force commanded by Gebhard Leberecht von Blücher, in the battle of Ligny June 16, 1815. But that would be Napoleon's final triumph. Napoleon sent a third of his troops to chase the retreating Prussians. Meanwhile, he led his remaining 72,000 men toward a confrontation with an allied force of 68,000 soldiers led by British General Arthur Wellesley, First Duke of Wellington, who was positioned near Waterloo, about a dozen miles from the Belgian city of Brussels.
At that point, Napoleon had a pretty good chance of winning. "The British and French were evenly matched," Mockaitis says.
But fate intervened. As French historian Thierry Lentz explains in this essay for the Fondation Napoleon, there was a heavy rainstorm the night before his planned attack on the British, and the ground was so soaked the next morning that the French had to wait until 11 a.m. to move their artillery into position. That deprived Napoleon of the element of surprise.
Was Napoleon Sick During the Battle?
To make matters worse, Napoleon hadn't slept due from some mysterious malady. Some bio-historians believe was a severe case of hemorrhoids, which may have made it excruciatingly painful for Napoleon to sit on horseback that day as he directed his forces. It also may have made it harder for him to think clearly at crucial moments.
According to Lentz's essay, Napoleon's plan was to pin down Wellington's forces at the strongest point in their line, the right flank, and then turn them back at the left flank. Ideally that would have forced Wellington to retreat from the battlefield to the northwest, before the Prussian army led by Blücher could arrive and join forces with Wellington.
But Napoleon didn't count on the tenacity of the force led by Wellington, who was an expert at defensive warfare. He took advantage of a ridge to shield his men from the French bombardment, and their line didn't break. Without the ability to outmaneuver the allies, Napoleon's elegant plan degenerated into a frontal assault. By the afternoon, Napoleon could see Blücher's troops approaching in the distance. The French calvary desperately attacked Wellington's line of soldiers, but they held.
"The battle was a tactical draw until late in the day when Blücher's Prussian's arrived tilting the balance decisively against the French," Mockaitis says.
When the Prussians finally arrived, it was the French line that collapsed. Napoleon's army of 72,000 suffered 26,000 killed or wounded, plus another 9,000 captured and 9,000 missing in action, according to David Eggenberger's book "An Encyclopedia of Battles." The emperor's comeback was over. He abdicated for the second and final time four days later.
But even in defeat, Napoleon was still feared. This time, the allies exiled him to St. Helena, a remote island in the mid-Atlantic, 1,200 miles (1,931 kilometers) from the coast of Africa. He lived there, under the watchful eye of Governor Sir Hudson Lowe, who refused to address him as emperor, though he did agree to build him a new house. Napoleon died there May 5, 1821.
Montmirail and Vauchamps 1814
Montmirail and Vauchamps 1814 is a complete game in the Jours de Gloire series. It covers the battles which occurred on February 11 and 14, 1814, during Napoléon’s offensive against Blücher’s Army of Silesia.
Montmirail and Vauchamps 1814 are battles which give players numerous challenges. Can the French player strike hard and fast, before his enemies escape him? Should Napoléon send the Imperial Guard into the battle ? Will the Austro-Russian player have enough time to organize defensive positions ? Can Blücher risk a counter-attack ?
Units: 1 strength point equals 150 cavalry, 200 infantry, or 3 cannons
Turns: 1 turn for 1 hour
Map: 300 meters per hex.
Game length: 4 scenarios lasting 7 to 12 turns (4 to 8 hours of play)