🐦

There are many sources for the Napoleonic period, but a lot of them aren't reliable; getting hung up on what's true and what's fictional isn't always productive and can be painful. Still, I want to have a light discussion about one particular episode — I'm not a specialist, I just want people to know about it.

In Zins's biography of Lannes, he writes that Bessières, when Lannes collapsed into Napoleon's arms, was one of those deeply moved and stepped forward to tug Lannes's hand. Zins says this comes from General Pelet's memoirs, but — as another enthusiast (and also a professional; I don't know her well, so I'm not sure if tagging her here is appropriate) pointed out — that hand-tugging episode does not appear in Pelet's memoirs.

However, the hand-tug is not something Zins invented out of thin air. In Thiers's Histoire du Consulat et de l'Empire (Tome 10), there is a scene where Bessières grabs the seriously wounded Lannes's hand and even turns his face away because the two had had a heated argument the day before and Bessières feared Lannes might be angry if he saw him.

But the story doesn't end there. Thiers — according to his account — has Lannes being carried away immediately after he was wounded, wrapped in a cloak by Bessières and général César de Laville; at that moment Bessières took Lannes's hand. That's different from Zins's version, which places the hand-tug later, after Lannes had already been carried away, when Napoleon came to see him. In the accounts that take the scene at the moment of wounding, Zins and the more widely read English biography by Chrisawn rely on Marbot's memoirs; Marbot says that he and several grenadiers carried Lannes away using forked branches. So on the question of who carried Lannes immediately after he was wounded, Thiers's version and Marbot’s version conflict. Zins follows Marbot but shifts Thiers's detail about Bessières's hand-tug to a later moment.

So are Marbot's memoirs reliable? We know Marbot liked to dramatize himself in his memoirs, and because he plays a large part in this episode, his claim deserves a question mark. On the other hand, both Zins and Chrisawn choose to cite Marbot here.

What about Thiers — is he reliable? What are his sources? By his own account he draws on the following people, and even Marbot, but he also insists he only relates indisputable facts, which might imply he did not accept Marbot’s version.

All right. Here we go, again. I understand the sometimes intense desire to have a special incident be true, rather than a fabrication. This usually leads to a veritable “down the rabbit hole” moment, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Historians do it all the time. They wouldn’t be worth much if they didn’t.

So now, in addition to the historian wannabe Zins and the aides-de-camp Pelet and Marbot, we have Adolphe Thiers.  All three have a dog in this JeanBoy/Bessie hunt. So let’s pick it all apart. Just remember that I wasn’t there.

What we already know: Zins is utterly incorrect in his attribution to Pelet. That’s a non-negotiable fact.

What no one is taking into account here is the geographical layout, the actual locations—and note that these are plural. That makes quite a difference. And the sequence of events. So here we go:

Lannes and most of his staff had retreated from Essling and their former defensive position in the huge granary; Napoleon had sent Lasalle to order them out and back to Lobau Island. Massena was still in Aspern, which was a couple of miles away to the southwest, and was also ordered to Lobau. It was on the way to Lobau that Lannes encountered his old friend Pouzet, who was killed in front of him. So Lannes moved away a short distance, likely no more than 20 yards, and plopped down on a small earthen dyke holding back a creek. These days, it runs through an Austrian’s backyard cabbage patch—yes, I’ve seen it, and that wasn’t easy at all. The only people there were a couple of ADCs, including Marbot. The others were dealing with Pouzet’s body. Massena was just beginning to pack up and leave Aspern, so neither he nor Pelet was anywhere near Marbot or Lannes.

And where, exactly, was Bessie? He and his cavalry units were closer to Aspern and Massena, where the ground was flatter, about half a mile or so away. He was NOT anywhere near Lannes, he was nowhere close enough to see anything, and because the injury occurred at 4:45 on a late May afternoon, it definitely was not dark.

And how do I know all this? From the journal and daily Situation Reports, which list everyone by name, rank, and physical location for the 2nd and 4th Corps and Bessie’s cavalry. These are archival documents and not someone’s memoirs.

As you know, Lannes was struck by the spent three-pound cannonball while he was sitting by himself. I have had no reason to doubt Marbot’s version of events here. And it was here that the issue of the stretcher made from ranches arose because Pouzet’s bloody cloak was not an option. I know Bessie was NOT one of the stretcher bearers because if he had been, someone credible would have noticed. Massena would also not have allowed his senior ADC go wandering over the battlefield while they were withdrawing from Aspern.

So now we have Lannes carried to the Lobau Island bridgehead not wrapped in a cloak but on a couple of sturdy limbs. Why Lobau? Because that’s where Larrey was and the other doctors and pharmaciens. So this is stop #2. And who is here? Marbot. Who is not here? Pelet. Massena. Bessieres. Napoleon, however, is on his way because he’s just been told what has happened.

Zins claims his citation regarding that at some point, Lannes “collapsed into Napoleon’s arms,” which is, of course, another crock of crap. He was already prone on the ground on those branches, so try to picture how we would collapse anywhere. This is just mawkish and ridiculous, as well as physically impossible. It was also at this exact point that Bessie indulged in the abortive hand-holding, according to Zins. The comment that Zins didn’t “invent” the handholding even though he lied about the Pelet citation but that doesn’t really matter , because Adolph Thiers said the same thing. Thiers is a secondary source whose own stories, especially about generals and marshals, not to mention administrative officials, can only be used with care. Thiers was an admirer of Napoleon, and the official who dedicated the Arc de Triomphe and arranged for Napoleon’s remains to be returned to France in 1840. His views of the Napoleonic era are biased. And should be used with care. There are ways to check Thiers’ claims regarding the sources he allegedly used, like the 24-page letter.

The third stop is in the center of Lobau Island in Larrey’s field hospital, which is where Napoleon shows up. But not Bessie.

The 4th stop is back to the mainland at Kaiser Enzersdorf. And Bessie didn’t go there. But neither did Pelet. And Marbot was not there at the end. Yes, I cited Marbot as being present when Lannes was wounded because the 2nd Corps documents place him there. That’s the usual rule with Marbor—and Madame Junor: cite them if someone or something else corroborates what they claim.