THE EDITOR'S COMMENTS ON THE QUESTION OF BATTLE CASUALTIES
IN EEL 77, pp. 23 and 54, a SERIES of questions on battle casualties were presented by Mr. Joseph Glasnowich. I feel it is an important and very controversial subject that has been discussed, partially, in EEL, on articles like the series on Maida, etc. Mr. Glasnowich remarks on and comments on the French losses at Abelsberg and Wagram are very pertinent and deserve an answer and at least investigation. Very likely the questions on battle casualties have come to the mind of many of our readers at one time or another.
EEL is going to attempt to investigate the question starting with this issue, in the "WAR OF 1809" section, with an evaluation of the French losses at Ebelsberg.
Mr. Glasnowich's questions presented in EEL 77, will be reprensented below in a divided, streamlined forms to ease the answering by EEL and the readership.
QUESTION 78-1:
I strongly feel a second look is called for a French losses incurred at the engagement at Ebelsberg (1809). Whereas Claparades' Division, which suffered most, numbered as of April 16th, 10195 men "present under arms (1) (excluding artillerists), and mustered 5450 combatants on the eve of Aspern, an unaccounted absence of 4745 men (2). Assuming Legrand's claim of '701 killed and wounded for the two French regiments he engaged is correct and considering the losses Bessieres and Marualaz's cavalry suffered at the outset of the action, the overall loss appears to exceed 5400 men.
QUESTION 78-2:
I, for one, am incensed at the oft unreasonable, unreasearched casualty assessment of some historians. A case point being David Chandler's claim of 6000 Austrian dead and 8000 at Marengo (3), a rate at which, taking into account the corresponding number of wounded, of which no mention is made, the 28500 Austrians actually engaged would have been annihilated at least once over.
QUESTION 78-3:
The losses at Wagram are another example. Some sources place the Austrian casualties for the action at: "37147 killed and wounded, including 730 officers plus an additional 6000(?) prisoners for a total loss of over 43000 effectives.
The first mentioned figure, derived from Petre, is an assessment of total losses by the Prussian Binder von Kriegelstein and the allowance is made by Petre that it included "several thousands missing who rejoined later" The official Austrian figure (23649 killed and wounded, 7585 captured) "does not differ widely, when these missing are included, from the Prussian writers estimate he states. Taking into consideration the reliability of official Austrian casualty figures for other engagements between 1792 - 1815, one would be hard put to question the authenticity of those available for Wagram.
A similar mistake is made in placing the total French loss at Wagram at 32500. The reality,borne out by the fact that 1822 French tallied junior officers were killed or wounded as opposed to 730 Austrians, is that at "least 32500 of the Grande Armee engaged in the battle laid dead or wounded.. .with a further /000 prisoners borne of by the Austrians (6). So, we are led to believe that an army which shows an officer loss of 1862 as opposed to 747 of the enemy sustained some 10000 fewer casualties in killed and wounded than the said enemy.
Question 78-4
Does anyone have any information concerning William Tollifson who may have served as a physician on the French General Staff during the Napoleonic Wars? Any data or information would be very much appreciated. Continued page 19
The two following drawings are part of our next page article:
Figure 2.1 Column of Battalions in Line
Figure 2.2 Battalion in Column of Platoons
Question 78-5:
In Professor Rothenberg's latest book, "Archduke Charles...." he states on page 183 that the Austrian Corps in 1813 had 1 line Division and 1 light Division. He then lists the Corps, 15,000 to 30,000 strong. Each Corps is supposed to have 6 line regiments. This does not appear to be enough to justify the numbers he lists for the totals. Unless each regiment had 4 or 5 battalions, each of over 1,000 men, it wouldn't work. I've red in "The Austro-Hungarian Army 1805-14" by W.J. Rawkins, that the Austrian Corps had 2 line Divisions and 1 light Division. Which, if either, is correct?
Back to Empire, Eagles, & Lions Table of Contents Vol. 1 No. 78
Back to EEL List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1993 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