Borodino (Great Battles)

I found the text generally fair and unbiased. Praise and critique are distributed equally among French-Allied and Russian forces. Smith's occasional reference to and comparison with Wellington's strategies and tactics in the Peninsula (I found only 3 instances on 151 pages related to the battle!) gives readers with a limited background on Napoleon's continental campaigns a good anchor, but they do not detract from the independent assessment of the opposing forces in this major battle of the 1812 Russian campaign.

To support the narrative, Digby Smith used eyewitness accounts from multiple sources. That many of these are of German or German-speaking individuals is not surprising, given that more than 30% of the French-Allied forces were from German-speaking states, and that many German officers were employed in the Russian army. Being cited, however, does not protect German sources from Smith's critique; von Phull, in particular, is justifiably criticized by Smith for his actions. Additionally, there are eyewitness accounts from Russians, Poles, and French which help to paint a broad picture of the battle.

Readers looking for an even wider selection of eyewitness accounts, however, may augment Smith's book by reading the books on the 1812 campaign by Austin and Brett-James, but they will not find substantive differences in the account of the facts of the battle.

Overall, this is an excellent book both for those who would like to read just one book on the battle of Borodino and for those who would like to expand their library on the campaign of 1812. For the latter, the incremental benefit of this book may be limited, but it still makes a very good, fluid, and interesting read!


One Star Book   June 14, 1999
 13 out of 24 found this review helpful

In this book I read about mistake after mistake which Napoleon made. This British author compares the greatest commander of all times to Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, etc. . . Why not also to Fidel Castro? . . . Although this is about one of the biggest clashes in all history, this book is more like a booklet. I expected muuuuch more.

OZ


Warning!   June 10, 1999
 21 out of 31 found this review helpful

Reader from Lachowo:

The title of this book should be THE GERMANS AT BORODINO. There was a gigantic war between France and Russia, with a vast majority of soldiers from these countries, but the author quoted mainly German soldiers and German commanders. So many interesting episodes are missing in this book. Why does the author seem deeply surprised every time the Russians or French used the ground as a cover? Well, they did it even years before 1812. For example, at Friedland the French infantry lay on the ground to avoid artillery fire. Their columns were hidden in the woods out of reach of the Russian cannons. At Austerlitz, Lannes' Corps was hidden behind a hill and unseen by the Russians in the beginning. From Polish memoirs I know that the Polish infantry also used a terrain as cover, and sometimes lay or sat on the ground.

The author regards the French and Russian commanders as idiots. He does not admire them at all, however, he admires Wellington. Every fifth page you can read about how beautiful Wellington was, and what wonders he could do on the flat Russian fields. The author forgot that this is not Peninsula, and Napoleon himself is present.

On the flat fields in Belgium Wellington made no great show. At Quatre Brass he had higher casualties than Ney , and he did not want to stand up against Napoleon without Prussian assurances of being present for support!

Poor performance comparing to Peninsula!

Anyway, if this author would write a book about Indians he would tell how much better Wellington was than Sitting Bull!

The author should hide himself on "reverse slope" together with his book.