Has any country in the world ever assembled a more talented military high command than the French did in the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars?

Sep 2013
411
France
#31
They were capable enough soldiers, however the big picture was not their strong point. Taking Moscow for example....won the battle, lost the campaign and most of the army.
It's Napoleon who is to blame then, not his generals. It was his choice to invade Russia, to go that far, and who leaded the whole campaign.
 

macon

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
3,995
Slovenia, EU
#33
Most of his marshals could not lead campaigns independently.

I like commanders of Alexander the Great and Diadochi period better.
Also late Roman republic generals and Genghis' commanders come to my mind as much better in their overall results than Napoleon's commanders.
 
Last edited:
Jan 2019
11
Kent, England
#35
There are also the English commanders of the Hundred Years War - not just Edward III, the Black Prince and Henry V, but also the Duke of Lancaster, Dagworth, Bentley, Bedford and Talbot. These men generally worked at a much higher level than Napoleon's Marshals, as due to poor communications they were often administrators and diplomats as well as soldiers.
 
Mar 2016
1,195
Australia
#36
There are also the English commanders of the Hundred Years War - not just Edward III, the Black Prince and Henry V, but also the Duke of Lancaster, Dagworth, Bentley, Bedford and Talbot. These men generally worked at a much higher level than Napoleon's Marshals, as due to poor communications they were often administrators and diplomats as well as soldiers.
Interesting example. I suppose it's no coincidence that by the mid-to-late 1360s - when all of the commanders of the first phase of the war were either dead, sick or old - the tide began to turn and the French gained the upper hand.
 

Similar History Discussions