(3) A QUESTION ON THE RELIABILITY OF THE FRENCH YEAR XI 6-POUNDER
by Frank Lancaster
My source, Osprey Men-At-Arms Series, Napoleon's Artillery, says the following about the Year XI system:
"The committee assembled on the command of the First Consul Napoleon, deliberated on the problems and drawbacks of the Gribeauval system....The committee continued to study the various problems seriously when the First Consul pressed for some material result. In 1803, as a consequence of this pressure, the committee recommended the manufacture of a 6-pdr field gun "courte de campagne", designed "System An XI"...The caliber was chosen to combat the lightness of the 4-pdr and the heaviness of the 8-pdr....The French 6-pdr, which was rushed into production without trials and which utilized the carriages and equipment of the Gribeauval to maintain interchangeability, was soon receiving adverse comments from the artillery, and reports of its poor performance and the quality of manufacture soon reached the committee. Eventually, the short 6-pdr was abandoned..."
Artillery Equipment of the Napoleonic Wars, also from Osprey Men-At-Arm s Series, says essentially the same thing. Another source mentions that the French 6-pdr had a tendency to shake itself to pieces. Could you elaborate on these points?
ANSWER TO THE ABOVE QUESTION AND COMMENTS
by the EEL Staff
In EEL 118 (Volume 1), we received a related question on the Year XI system, which is reproduced below in paragraph (5). That question triggered an answer by George Nafziger to be found elsewhere in the present issue.
Firstly, the above comments on the Year XI system are incomplete and mostly in error.
(1) Firstly, although he Year XI system was a direct evolution of the Gribeauval system, it did not use the carriages and equipment of the Gribeauval system, but a brand new, simplified system of carriages, wheels, etc. The gun and carriage of a Year XI 6-pdr is shown below.
(2) Secondly the Year XI system was not limited to the 6-pdr but also included a 12-pdr and a new 24-pdr howitzer to replace the larger 6in. Gribeauval howitzer.
(3) The Year XI was far from a short gun. Take a look at the table above, comparing the Austrian 6-pdr, the French 6-pdr and the British 6-pdr. From that table, it is easy to see that the French 6-pdr was by far the longest of the three. Its 17 caliber length combined with its lower windage gave it, at long range, a greater accuracy than the two other 6-pdrs. The French 6-pdr also had a greater range than the other 6-pounders.
(4) The Year XI system was not rushed into production without trials (see Marmont's Memoires) and was a fully ested system when it started to reach the French army of Germany and Italy in 1807-1808.
(5) It is also in error to state that the system was unreliable and of poor quality. French artillery equipment was of excellent quality. General Allix in his book System d'artillerie de campagne du général Allix comparé avec les systèmes d'artillerie de France, de Gribeauval et de l'An XI (i.e. General Allix's Artillery System Compared to that of the Committee, of the Gribeauval and Year XI Systems) has nothing but praise for the Year XI system. He considered the Year XI system superior to the Gribeauval system mainly because of the greater mobility of the 6-pdr of the new system, which replaced advantageously the 4-pdr, which was too light, and the 8-pdr which he considered a bit too heavy. Allix also praised the accuracy of the Year XI 6-pounder.
Was General Allix qualified to comment on the Year XI system? Allix was an artillery general formed during the Wars of the French Revolution and the Empire. He played a leading part in reorganizing Napoleon's artillery in 1815 and had been part of the original artillery committee. His comments are based on his actual combat experience .
(6) It is quite true that the Year XI system was replaced. However, that had nothing to do with its performances and reliability. The Year XI system was a product of the Revolution and was replaced after 1815 solely for political reasons by Louis the XVIIIth, who reintroduced the Gribeauval system which had been designed under his brother Louis the XVIth.
(7) The Year XI 6-pdr had a very sturdy carriage and no mention of the alleged fragility of the carriage can be found in French sources.
We'll conclude out answer by pointing out that many English language books completely ignore the Year XI system. That is the case in Chandler's The Campaigns of Napoleon and Christopher Duffy's Borodino, just to name a few. That is certainly due to the fact that in the Peninsula the British army and their allies only faced Gribeauval guns.
NOTE FROM EDITOR: The following has already been published in EEL 118 (Volume 1) and is reprinted to help our new readers to better understand the above comments as well as the article by George Nafziger to be found elsewhere in the present issue.
On the Reliability of Data Napoleonic Investigations
Back to Empire, Eagles, & Lions Table of Contents Vol. 2 No. 1
Back to EEL List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1993 by Emperor's Headquarters
This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com