Introduction A "READERS' FORUM" on Maida? Why? The subject has been already well covered in issue # 56. Perhaps, but it has been always EE&L policy to present, within reasons, the different opinions and ideas that are generated by our articles. One of E. E.& L's missions is to also seek the thruth. The UNBIASED truth. Not an easy task when one considers that, even after some 170 years after the actual events took place, a certain amount of chauvinism still affects historians and laymen (and wargamers). We have received an unusual amount of mail and comments on the articles authored by Jim Arnold and Jean A. Lochet on Maida and published in issue # 56. We have decided to published them all. Not a word has been changed or deleted. That was possible because our authors present their data and points of view etc. on a high level of gentlemenship. A great deal of new unpublished material has been "uncovered" by our contributors and that alone justifies the present "forum". In issue # 56, I have pointed out in my article "Historians, Falsehoods and the Napoleonic Wargamer", the importance of the battle of Maida that is considered by many historians as the typical battle between the British infantry in line, versus the French in column. What is at stake here is simple. Were the French in line or in column at Maida? Controversy Starts The controversy was started by Sir Charles Oman in his first work "Column and Line in the Peninsula" in 1910 and published, at a later date (apperently" in 1929) with other studies, in "Studies in the Napoleonic Wars", in which Oman reported the French in column. At a later date, unknown to me, since the first edition not available to me was published in 1912, Oman in "Wellington Army, 1809-1814", (I have a reprint edition dated 1968) reports: "At this fight the French General Reynier had deployed the whole, or the greater part, of his battalions, who were not as usual fighting either in ordre mixte or in battalion column." The footnote to be found in "Wellington's Army, 1804-1814". page 78, is even more to the point: "Till lately I had sopposed that Reynier had at least his left wing, or striking echelon, in columns of battalions, but evidence put before me seems to prove that despite of the fact that the French narratives do not show it, the majority at least of Reynier's men were deployed. This is borne out by Bunbury's narrative, p.244. where it is definitely stated, as well as by Boothby's. p.78." Both quotations were already presented in issue # 56. We do not intend to further extend on the articles of issue # 56. However they can not be separated from the present "FORUM". We strongly recommend our readers to read again, in issue # 56, the articles pertinent to Maida. The following series of articles on Maida present different points of view but some very key documents which, as far as I know, have never been presented togither, or even, like the letter froll Reynier to Joseph, taken in consideration by many historians since they simply were not aware of its existence. We can simply congratulate our contributors for doing their home work so well! Maida Special Readers Forum Introduction I. Extract from the Letter of Reynier to Joseph II. More on the Battle of Maida III. Extracts from "Naples sous Joseph Bonaparte, 1806-1808" IV. A Perplexing Look on the Articles on Maida and the Discussion on Columns vs. Line Analysis, Comments, and Considerations on Maida Articles Back to Empire, Eagles, & Lions Table of Contents Vol. 1 No. 58 Back to EEL List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1981 by Emperor's Headquarters This article appears in MagWeb.com (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com