Where were the Russian army when Napoleon invaded?

Sarmat, you are repeating unscientifical sources repeatedly. that shows me well enough that you have never read abook at all about this topic and i grow tired of feeding your nationalist troll behaviour. anyways, for sources about Borodino being a French victory, read "Borodino, the Moscova" by Francois-Guy Hourtoulle. he is most respected and has also written books about other victories by Napoleon. i never found it necessary to coem up with a source for that, i eman who would come up to prove that, for example Stalingrad was a German victory? :D

the account on Kutuzov shows falacities. for example, he didn't fought D�renstein, that was done by Bagration. second, it was not Kutuzov who advocated the retreat itno Russia but Barclay de Tolly, as me & rider told you a thosuand times already. the guy that wrote that article probably doesn't even know that barclay even exists at all. it was Barclay who advocated constant retreat, a startegy that costed the French 150,000 men due to exhaustion from forced marches to catch the Russian Army and skrimsihes which were won by the Russian subcomanders of Barclay & Bagration. Borodino did cost teh French nothing, but the Russian Army was shattered, while Barclay & Bagration were able to keep their armies intact tot hat point.

Napoleon, having failed to make peace with the Russians and being unwilling to spend the winter in Moscow, left the city in October. He tried to move southwestward, but Kutuzov blocked his attempt to proceed along the fertile, southern route by giving battle at Maloyaroslavets (October 19). By forcing the disintegrating French army to leave Russia by the path it had devastated when it entered the country, Kutuzov destroyed his opponent without fighting another major battle.

this is the most ridiculous part. in fatc it was Napoleon who ahs choosen his own path to retreat. he sent Murats cavalry to make a sally from Moscow towards the Russians to deceive them, on this occasion Murat overrun at least 2 Russian infantry columns, and only failed to destroy the thrid one because he didn't waited for the artillery to follow hsi charge. as for cources, this battle description i ahve from a strategical manual by the W�rttemberg staff general of cavalry, released in a book about cavalry in 1816, i have it as .pdf an can sent it to you if you can read German with gothic letters. Kutuzov had ZERO influence of the unfolding of those events.

Kutuzov's troops harried the retreating French, engaging them at Vyazma and Krasnoye, and the remnants of Napoleon's army narrowly escaped annihilation at the crossing of the Berezina River in late November.

another ridiculous statement. i have the regimental records of the Baden Hussars who together with the Hessen-Darmstadt Chevau-Legers under the command of the gifted General de Brigade Fournier(-Sarloveze) charged the advancign Russian infantry columns and overrun 3 columns of infantry before being thesmelves taken int eh flank by Russian Hussars and gotten destroyed. in all events the battle of Studyanka seems hardly as an almost annihialtion of French troops but rather of an almost annihilation of the Russian Army :D it were Cossack and partizan raids on isolated columns who really hurt the Grande Armees retreat, those battles fought by the main Russian Army did nothing to stop them nor defeat them in any way.


the source you posted has been prooven incorrect, what are the sources of this "article" anyways? if you won't bring up sources about Napoleonic Wars other than online crap written by nationalists i won't respond to you again. wikipedia and related sites are NOT reliable and due to their very nature will probably never be.

Originally posted by Temujin   I have read dozens of books abotu Napoleonic Wars, inf atc it is my favourite hsitory topic, other than Steppe Hsitory. and most of them were written by scholars.

Originally posted by Temujin Sarmat, you are repeating unscientifical sources repeatedly. that shows me well enough that you have never read abook at all about this topic and i grow tired of feeding your nationalist troll behaviour. anyways, for sources about Borodino being a French victory, read "Borodino, the Moscova" by Francois-Guy Hourtoulle. he is most respected and has also written books about other victories by Napoleon. i never found it necessary to coem up with a source for that, i eman who would come up to prove that, for example Stalingrad was a German victory? :D the account on Kutuzov shows falacities. for example, he didn't fought D�renstein, that was done by Bagration. second, it was not Kutuzov who advocated the retreat itno Russia but Barclay de Tolly, as me & rider told you a thosuand times already. the guy that wrote that article probably doesn't even know that barclay even exists at all. it was Barclay who advocated constant retreat, a startegy that costed the French 150,000 men due to exhaustion from forced marches to catch the Russian Army and skrimsihes which were won by the Russian subcomanders of Barclay & Bagration. Borodino did cost teh French nothing, but the Russian Army was shattered, while Barclay & Bagration were able to keep their armies intact tot hat point. Napoleon, having failed to make peace with the Russians and being unwilling to spend the winter in Moscow, left the city in October. He tried to move southwestward, but Kutuzov blocked his attempt to proceed along the fertile, southern route by giving battle at Maloyaroslavets (October 19). By forcing the disintegrating French army to leave Russia by the path it had devastated when it entered the country, Kutuzov destroyed his opponent without fighting another major battle. this is the most ridiculous part. in fatc it was Napoleon who ahs choosen his own path to retreat. he sent Murats cavalry to make a sally from Moscow towards the Russians to deceive them, on this occasion Murat overrun at least 2 Russian infantry columns, and only failed to destroy the thrid one because he didn't waited for the artillery to follow hsi charge. as for cources, this battle description i ahve from a strategical manual by the W�rttemberg staff general of cavalry, released in a book about cavalry in 1816, i have it as .pdf an can sent it to you if you can read German with gothic letters. Kutuzov had ZERO influence of the unfolding of those events. Kutuzov's troops harried the retreating French, engaging them at Vyazma and Krasnoye, and the remnants of Napoleon's army narrowly escaped annihilation at the crossing of the Berezina River in late November. another ridiculous statement. i have the regimental records of the Baden Hussars who together with the Hessen-Darmstadt Chevau-Legers under the command of the gifted General de Brigade Fournier(-Sarloveze) charged the advancign Russian infantry columns and overrun 3 columns of infantry before being thesmelves taken int eh flank by Russian Hussars and gotten destroyed. in all events the battle of Studyanka seems hardly as an almost annihialtion of French troops but rather of an almost annihilation of the Russian Army :D it were Cossack and partizan raids on isolated columns who really hurt the Grande Armees retreat, those battles fought by the main Russian Army did nothing to stop them nor defeat them in any way. the source you posted has been prooven incorrect, what are the sources of this "article" anyways? if you won't bring up sources about Napoleonic Wars other than online crap written by nationalists i won't respond to you again. wikipedia and related sites are NOT reliable and due to their very nature will probably never be.

Edited by Sarmat12 - 21-Jul-2007 at 15:22

Originally posted by Sarmat12   Who are you?  The brightest authority on the Napoleonic wars, the professor who wrote the books of his own?   I tend to trust Britannica more than you, and even Wiki looks better than the nonsense you write here.

i prenseted you soruces which are either first hand accounts or world-reknown authors about Napoleonic Wars. Britannica is just a generic encyclopedia that does no intensive in-depth research.