1812. Adam Zamoyski

       22 Empire of Death

       23 The End of the Road

       24 His Majesty’s Health

       25 The Legend

       Plates

       Notes

       Sources

       Index

       About the Author

       Reviews

       Praise

       By the Same Author

       About the Publisher

       Select Glossary of Place-Names in the Former Polish Lands of the Russian Empire

      Babinovitse: Babinowicze (Polish), present-day Babinavicy (Belarus)

      Berezina: Berezyna (Polish), present-day Bjarezina (Belarus)

      Beshenkoviche: Bieszenkowicze (Polish), present-day

      Bešankovicy (Belarus)

      Bobr: Bóbr (Polish), present-day Bobr (Belarus)

      Borisov: Borysów (Polish), present-day Barysau (Belarus)

      Brest: Brzesc (Polish), present-day Brést (Belarus)

      Dnieper: Dniepr (Polish), present-day Dnjapro (Belarus)

      Drissa: Dryssa (Polish), present-day Verhnjadzvinsk (Belarus)

      Dubrovna: Dubrowna (Polish), present-day Dubrovno (Belarus)

      Dunaburg: Dzwinsk (Polish), present-day Daugavpils (Latvia)

      Glubokoie: Głebokie (Polish), present-day Glybokae (Belarus)

      Grodno: Grodno (Polish), Grodna (Belarus)

      Kobryn: Kobryn (Polish), present-day Kobryn (Belarus)

      Kovno: Kowno (Polish), present-day Kaunas (Lithuania)

      Ladi: Lady (Polish), present-day Liadi (Belarus)

      Loshnitsa: Łosznica (Polish), present-day Lošnica (Belarus)

      Miedniki: Miedniki (Polish), present-day Medininkai (Lithuania)

      Minsk: Minsk (Polish), present-day Minsk (Belarus)

      Mogilev: Mohylów (Polish), present-day Magilev (Belarus)

      Molodechno: Mołodeczno (Polish), present-day Maladzecna (Belarus)

      Mstislav: Mscislaw (Polish), present-day Mscislav (Belarus)

      Niemen (river): Niemen (Polish), present-day Nemunas (Lithuania)

      Nieshviezh: Nieswiez (Polish), present-day Njasviž (Belarus)

      Orsha: Orsza (Polish), present-day Orša (Belarus)

      Oshmiana: Oszmiana (Polish), present-day Ašmjany (Belarus)

      Ostrovno: Ostrowno (Polish), present-day Astrovna (Belarus)

      Pleshchenitse: Pleszczenice (Polish), present-day Plescanicy (Belarus)

      Polotsk: Polock (Polish), present-day Polack (Belarus)

      Ponary: Ponary (Polish), Panarai (Lithuania)

      Shvienchiany: Swieciany (Polish), present-day Svencionys (Lithuania)

      Smorgonie: Smorgonie (Polish), present-day Smarhon’ (Belarus)

      Studzienka: Studzienka (Polish), present-day Studenka (Belarus)

      Tolochin: Toloczyn (Polish), present-day Talacyn (Belarus)

      Troki: Troki (Polish), Trakai (Lithuania)

      Vesselovo: Weselowo (Polish), Veselovo (Belarus)

      Vilia: Wilja (Polish), present-day Neris (Lithuania)

      Vilna: Wilno (Polish), present-day Vilnius (Lithuania)

      Vitebsk: Witebsk (Polish), present-day Vicebsk (Belarus)

      Volkovisk: Wołkowyski (Polish), present-day Vavkavysk (Belarus)

      Zakrent: Zakret (Polish)

      Ziembin: Ziembin (Polish), present-day Zembin (Belarus)

       Introductory Note

      Napoleon’s invasion of Russia in 1812 was one of the most dramatic episodes in European history, an event of epic proportions, etched deeply in the popular imagination. I only had to mention the subject of this book for people to come to life, stirred by recollections of Tolstoy’s War and Peace, by the scale of the tragedy, by some anecdote that had lodged itself in their memory, or just a mental image of snowbound Napoleonic tragedy. But the flash of recognition was almost invariably followed by an admission of total ignorance of what had actually happened and why. The reasons for this curious discrepancy are fascinating in themselves.

      No other campaign in history has been subjected to such overtly political uses. From the very beginning, studies of the subject have been driven by a compulsion to interpret and justify that admits of no objectivity, while their sheer volume – over five thousand books and twice as many articles published in Russia alone in the hundred years after 1812 – has helped only to cloud the issue.¹

      This was to be expected, considering what was involved. There were great reputations at stake: those of Napoleon, of Tsar Alexander, of Field Marshal Kutuzov, to name only the obvious ones. There was also a need to make sense of the whole business, for this war, unprecedented in the history of Europe in both scale and horror, was not easy to assess in military terms. The action was often confused. Both sides claimed victory in every engagement. And if the French had lost the campaign, the Russians could hardly be said to have won it. At the same time, people on both sides had behaved with a savagery that neither nation wished to contemplate.

      In France, early attempts at a balanced study were complicated by political factors: the regime which replaced Napoleon’s soon after the events required anything to do with him to be represented in the most negative terms. Censorship also played a part in Russian assessments, for more complex reasons. The events of 1812 and their aftermath raised questions about the very nature of the Russian state and its people, and, as the historian Orlando Figes nicely puts it, ‘the nine-teenth-century quest for Russian nationhood began in the ranks of 1812’.²

      This quest was innately subversive of the Tsarist system, and led in the first place to the Decembrist Rising of 1825. It was pursued, along divergent paths, by those who sought a more modern Russia integrated into the mainstream of Western civilisation, and by the slavophiles, who rejected the West and all it stood for, seeking instead a truly ‘Russian’ way. The events of 1812 were used by both sides to back up their arguments, rapidly