“The staff officers’ assessment of Ney”
In Louis Garros’s biography of Ney, there is a passage stating that “the memoirs left by his staff officers (unfortunately few in number) unanimously praise their commander (Ney) for his kindness and frankness.”
I have so far been able to confirm the memoirs of Levavasseur, Fezensac, and Béchet. Among them, Levavasseur’s memoirs have been noted for a tendency to gloss over Ney’s (military) failures due to his excessive admiration for his superior.
As for Fezensac, it is a second-hand citation from Horricks, but there is the following passage:
“He (Ney), he says:could sometimes be aloof and even brusque, but only in the cause of military discipline or to command obedience. Otherwise he was familiar, generous, warm-hearted and loved by everyone. He liked to dine separately; either with his close friend General Colbert, but more often than not talking war with Colonel Jomini, the Swiss who was allowed to wear his own uniform and appeared to us cold, very much the intellectual. Afterwards though the Marshal could be relied on to join in our mess-amusements. It was his natural instinct when relaxing to laugh, and he enjoyed our songs and jokes.”
Fezensac also writes as follows:
“He was incapable of delivering a calm rebuke; he would either remain utterly silent or explode into an unrestrained rage. Yet, his heart was inherently good, his judgment sound, and his spirit balanced. These are qualities of the utmost importance in a military man”
Béchet spent 16 years by Ney's side and, in his later years, wrote his memoirs for his children. However, these memoirs conclude with the Peninsular War. It seems Béchet was also deeply devoted to Ney, as he provides no detailed account of Ney’s military failures. He describes Ney’s character as follows:
“When making arrangements in his office, he was sometimes anxious and indecisive; yet, the moment he found himself on the battlefield in the presence of the enemy, he regained all his self-assurance and felt relieved of a heavy burden. He was truly admirable in those difficult circumstances where, forced to conduct a retreat against a superior enemy and caught in a precarious position, he had great obstacles to overcome. Sure of himself and of the confidence he inspired in his troops, he maneuvered with as much composure as if he were on a training exercise; his presence alone electrified his soldiers, who relied on him just as he relied on them, and thus he was as loved as he was esteemed. Although he sometimes had abrupt manners and was prone to sudden outbursts that were not easy to foresee or avoid, he was genuinely kind; a word of apology or the admission of a fault or mistake would disarm him. I have often put this to the test. Occasionally, he had reason to complain about officers attached to him, yet he never took revenge on them except by doing them good; he never dismissed them from his service without having first secured a higher rank for them.”
BĂ©chet appears to have been critical of Jomini's presence within the staff.
“We will see him, on several occasions, give proof of that easy-going nature which led him to welcome people around him who were poorly suited to him.”
According to the editor, this refers to Jomini.
I haven't finished reading Béchet’s memoirs yet, and I am looking forward to seeing how he writes about the 'Roi Nicolas' affair.
