Talk:French invasion of Russia

Pilona and Prenn, Piliuona and Prienai, Pilony and Plensig.

I was about to suggest, jokingly, that while we now know that Eugène de Beauharnais cannot have crossed the Neman at Prenn, two reputable published sources say he did, so as good Wikipedians we should dutifully repeat that misinformation. @Taksen, you beat me to the punchline.

Riehn, presumably following Thiers, has Eugène crossing the Neman at Prenn, i.e. Prienai. Numerous other accounts, including a very detailed first-hand testimony from Labaume, and the published correspondence of Eugène and Napoleon, place the crossing point at "Pilony", which I've (tentatively) identified as Piliuona.

I'll fill out the precise references when I have more time, but my main sources are:

Correspondance de Napoléon Ier: 12 novembre 1811-30 juin 1812

Mémoires et correspondance politique et militaire du prince Eugène Volume 7

Eugène Labaume: A Circumstantial Narrative of the Campaign in Russia

In summary, Napoleon writes to Berthier on 26 June, instructing him to have Eblé raise one of the pontoon bridges used in his initial crossing, and transport it by land to Piloni.

Berthier conveys these orders to Eugène, urging him to make haste to Piloni in order to cross on the night of the 27th - 28th, and to write to Napoleon at Jimoroui (Žiežmariai).

On the 28th, Berthier writes to Eugène from Wilna asking for news, and informing him that Eblé will raise the bridge as soon as the Army of Italy is across.

On the 29th, Labaume arrives at Pilony with the 4th corps and sees the pontoon bridge being constructed. Eugène writes to his wife Augusta that from his tent he can see the troops of the Army of Italy crossing the bridge into Russia.

Labaume and the entire Army of Italy cross the pontoon bridge at Pilony on the 30th and 1st. From Pilony they travel to Zismori (Jijmory, Jimoroui, today Žiežmariai) and then on to Melangani (Mijaugonys?) - a total distance of 9 leagues.

I think that's all pretty clear. There's certainly no reason to think that Eugène failed to cross at Pilony then moved south to Prenn.

The 29th of June was an extremely hot day; Eblé had to move one bridge and boats to Piloni with horses that probably dropped dead along the road; or did he come by boat? It looks like they crossed the river in small boats. Taksen (talk) 07:12, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

The pontoon bridges were moved by land on their own carriages or trailers (fr:haquets). Napoleon gave the order on the morning of the 26th to raise one of the pontoon bridges from Kowno at noon and transport it on its haquets to Piloni on the 27th, expecting Eugène to arrive in Piloni that day (Order 18870 p 634). As we know from Labaume, Eugène reached Piloni on the 29th, and the crossing wasn't complete until the 1st.

Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 14:36, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Here's a quick translation of Napoléon's order:

Cousin,

Give the order to General Eblé to begin at noon to raise one of the three pontoon bridges, to load it onto its trailers, and to dispatch it tomorrow morning, to be brought during the day of the 27th to the village of Piloni, where a bridge will be installed for the crossing of the Army of Italy. He will send with this bridge a senior officer of the bridge engineers who will take orders from the commanding officer of the artillery of the 4th corps concerning the installation of the bridge, which will take place as soon as the viceroy (i.e. Eugène) gives the order and is able to cross ...

Write to the viceroy to let him know that tomorrow morning a pontoon bridge will leave for Piloni; that he should send his marines and sappers to install said bridge, across which he will pass with the 4th and 6th corps and his cavalry. You will let him know that we occupy Jijmory (Žiežmariai) and are ten leagues from Vilna.

Napoléon.

PS Write to the viceroy that I strongly desire that his bridge be installed on the night of the 27th - 28th in order that he be in line during the day of the 28th.

Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 14:42, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Великая_армия 2A00:1FA3:4200:78C0:1:1:3E76:4FA0 (talk) 11:03, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Here's another source that places the crossing at Pilony on the 29th and 30th, Pilony being "between Plensig and Kowno". Plensig must surely be Prenn.

Here's another:

Eugène's command, the 4th and 6th corps, crossed the Niemen at Pilony, a little above Kowno, one of the pontoon bridges from Kowno, where a permanent pile bridge was now being constructed, being used for the purpose, and was hence directed on Novi Troki, near Vilna.

Ségur also has Eugène crossing at Pilony: "L'armée d'Italie ne le traversa que le 29, devant Pilony."

There's still the problem that we lack a definitive source that positively identifies Pilony as modern Piliuona, but is there really any doubt?

Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 13:10, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Nice sources! No doubt, Labaume mentions it took them two hours to walk to Kruonis, which is an 8 km distance. Taksen (talk) 21:28, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

And finally, "Pilona", on a Polish map of 1932!
Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 11:26, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Jean-de-Nivelle, hi and congrats! This Pilona is indeed next to a less steep section of the western river bank, at Dabinty on the opposite side one can also climb up the river bank more easily, the topographic map makes that clear, and if "a little above Kowno" means upstream (as opposed to further up north), which makes sense, then you have it. It's also a strategically smart place, as a downstream location would have meant the need for a second crossing, of that northern affluent, the Wilja. I would bet that Piloni or a variation thereof means something (in Polish? Lithuanian?), otherwise you wouldn't have so many; knowing the meaning might help understand the story of the place, for instance if it meant "ford" or "passage", but that's not this article's concern. I guess you want to bring up li.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piliuona at least to a reasonable "stub" level :) Keep up the good work and have a happy year 2022! Arminden (talk) 13:46, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

In between, I made several additions to Napoleon's Hill. There was also a 4th bridge from Aleksotas to Kovno, but it seems that one wasn't used. Ney had to protect it until new orders?Taksen (talk) 17:54, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Napoleon's Order 18857 (23 Jun) p 625 specifies that a fourth pontoon bridge was to be kept in reserve on the heights behind Alexota, then deployed across the Niemen at Alexota after Kovno was taken. The crossing at Alexota being only 50 toises, a further pontoon bridge was then to be installed across the Viliya using the spare pontoons. Order 18876 of 30 Jun instructs Eblé to advance to Vilna with all the pontoon teams and equipment, beginning with that used by Eugène at Pilony, leaving a bridge built on piles across the Niemen at Kovno, and a raft bridge across the Viliya.

Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 19:26, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Oudinot may have used the raft bridge. Do you think C.S. Forrester is a good source? He probably had a source. You did not add much, but if you think more details are necessary, let me know or add them yourself. Thanks for all your help, the section improved a lot; it has never been so clear to me since I started five years ago to study the invasion as one of my ancestors took part in it.Taksen (talk) 09:34, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm happy to have made a small contribution. I quite enjoy the detective work involved, although I do feel it may be a little too close to Original Research for Wikipedia.

I wouldn't be comfortable with Forester as a source when there are so many factual sources available, but one thing the Prenn-Pilona question illustrates quite clearly is that even reputable sources can be mistaken, and details need to be cross-checked before being accepted as fact.

I read and think quite slowly and write still more so. This is a subject I know very little about: I don't have the time at present to do the necessary reading to expand my knowledge, so I don't feel well placed to make big contributions to the article. I do have a few small ideas, and I'll read through and clean up at some point, but there's urgent business to take care of over at Cary Grant!

Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 12:00, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

I would not worry about original research. The Lithuanian historian Gaidis started to write about Napoleon's Hill in 1984. In 2020 his article was translated and published again. Such sources were hardly available to the general public until the Internet appeared. You found the original sources in French, Gaidis didn't. I hope we can cooperate somewhere else.Taksen (talk) 14:21, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Recent revert

Srich32977, you are allowed to delete what is unreferenced. What you did looks arbitrary.Taksen (talk) 16:42, 7 September 2023 (UTC) I'm watching this clever lecture on YouTube: The Tsar Liberates Europe? Russia against Napoleon, 1807-1814. It will take some time to find the references in Lieven's book.Taksen (talk) 05:00, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Epidemic typhus

@AustralopithecusSurfer: The epidemic typhus caused by body lice was one of the main reasons for this sentence in the lead: "Napoleon lost half of the men because of the extreme weather conditions, disease and hunger". It was not arbitrarily added but in sync with the caption within the infobox: "Napoleon's soldiers enter Russia and have to fight * "against body lice causing epidemic typhus" * against heat, thirst and diphteria * against hunger and dysentery * against the Russian army at Smolensk * against Kutuzov at Borodino * against arsonists in Moscow * against the cold * against the Cossacks * against the freezing water of the Berezina. * Napoleon abandons his army * but Ney saves the remaining soldiers." My comment for the previous change was: " ‎As the old collage within the infobox showed the wrong interpretation that General Winter defeated Napoleon, the new collage shows the diseases, the heat and the cold". Now the multiple images template is out of sync. I suggest to take back your last change or find and add a better picture for epidemic typhus. The ugly louse might have killed 100.000 soldiers.Ruedi33a (talk) 10:42, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

New drawing added to get the template in sync. It shows the effect of epidemic typhus to French soldiers in 1813. Ruedi33a (talk) 11:07, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Collaborative Style Improvement

ChatGPT helped me a lot to make the article prettier to read. Sentences became more logical and understandable by moving parts around : "Acknowledging the collaborative effort, this article underwent refinement for style enhancement with the assistance of ChatGPT, focusing on improving the language and structure without introducing new information. The goal was to ensure clarity and conciseness while maintaining factual accuracy in line with Wikipedia's guidelines."Taksen (talk) 21:53, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

I disagree 100%. In the several changes I looked at, I couldn't find a single one that didn't make the article uglier to read. Here's just one example. The original sentence:

Napoleon and the Grande Armée were used to living off the land, which had worked well in the densely populated and agriculturally rich central Europe with its dense network of roads.

ChatGPT's revision:

Napoleon and the Grande Armée were accustomed to utilizing the method of living off the land, which proved successful in the densely populated and agriculturally prosperous regions of central Europe, characterized by a well-connected network of roads.

If by "clarity and conciseness" you mean "sounds like it was written by a clueless piece of software trying to imitate a constipated business executive trying to imitate a constipated lawyer," you succeeded. By all other measures, the prose of the article is significantly worse. Please revert it to the version written by actual human beings. 2604:3D09:A984:A600:9571:6338:EC9A:DC8C (talk) 17:40, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

I was wondering why the lede was so peacocky. Sentences like The once-formidable Grande Armée disintegrated into a disordered multitude, leaving the Russians with no alternative but to witness the crumbling state of the invaders are thorougly unencyclopedic. Ursus arctos californicus (talk) 20:27, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

That very sentence is what led me here to see if anyone else noticed. "leaving the Russians with no alternative but to witness the crumbling state of the invaders" - totally nonsensical! 70.107.79.187 (talk) 02:10, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Denmark

Somehow Denmark was an ally of Napoleon:

• Battle of Lyngør
• After the French withdrawal from Germany, Napoleon's remaining ally, Denmark–Norway, became isolated and fell to the coalition.