Le maréchal Marmont (1774-1852), un itinéraire militaire à l'ombre de Napoléon Bonaparte: de l'amitié à la trahison ?
Résumé :
Auguste-Frédéric-Louis Viesse de Marmont (1774-1852) est le personnage le plus illustre d’une famille de militaires dont la généalogie et la notoriété remontent au XVIe siècle. Fils d’un officier de petite noblesse, il se lie très tôt avec le jeune Bonaparte et combat avec lui à Toulon en 1793. Depuis, des liens d’amitié se tissent entre les deux compagnons d’armes. Aucune biographie académique n’a été réalisée sur ce personnage dont le parcours est riche et varié et dont les Mémoires constituent un témoignage essentiel de l’histoire du Premier Empire.Marmont connaît une carrière fulgurante et gravit rapidement les échelons de l’armée. En compagnie de son ami, il fait la campagne d’Égypte, les deux campagnes d’Italie jusqu’à devenir Gouverneur général des Provinces illyriennes de 1809 à 1811 et à ce titre participe à la modernisation de ce territoire. Sa carrière se poursuivant jusqu’en 1830, il est alors chargé de faire exécuter les ordonnances de Juillet, mission à laquelle il échoue et qui met un terme à sa carrière. Mais son nom demeure principalement attaché à l’acte de trahison du 5 avril 1814 qui marque un tournant dans l’histoire du Premier Empire. Depuis, la figure du traître parcourt le XIXe siècle. Dans cette thèse, la question de l’ascension politique de Bonaparte sera donc interrogée pour savoir si elle induit celle de ses compagnons d’armes. De ce fait, en évoquant la question des réseaux, l’étude biographique permet de se poser la question de la nature des relations qui peuvent exister entre hommes de pouvoir et hommes d’armes. L’objectif principal de ce travail est donc le suivant : il s’agit de savoir, dans une dynamique croisée, comment cette amitié émerge, la façon dont elle évolue depuis 1792 et la manière dont cette morale militaire soude les liens entre les deux soldats. Ainsi, nous pourrons mettre à jour la biographie du maréchal ; ce qui permettra dans cette recherche d’élucider enfin la question de la trahison imputée à Marmont.
https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-03141902
I think you have hit a nail on the head. @Hans - Karl Weiß . It’s a romantic notion of the heroic defence until the last bullet. For junior officers on the battlefield perhaps. Generals (and Marshals) are charged with more strategic considerations. Joseph had already fled. The Cossacks were watering their horses in the Seine. Monmartre was in Russian hands. The Austrians were advancing. Marmont’s forces were outnumbered. The jig was up, everyone (with the possible exception of Napoleon) eventually knew it. Marmont was just ahead of the game. The ‘raguser’ verb was a Bonapartist construct, based on the betrayed martyr meme. It is only really proof that Napoleon believed himself to be betrayed. Like Percival and Von Paulus after him, Mormont probably believed he was saving lives that would otherwise be wasted in a lost cause. In this respect Marmont was right, Napoleon was a lost cause
well clearly another victim of Nabulieone propaganda, nobody is interested to delve into well researched works any longer, one could start reading the memoire which Tom Holmberg kindly supplied - otherwise another Berezina.
??????
Je suis français depuis 54 ans, je n'ai jamais entendu ce verbe "Raguser"!
Mais il existe effectivement.
Cordialement
Napoleon became friends with Marmont at Toulon in 1793. Marmont had graduated from the Metz artillery school that same year. Napoleon appointed Marmont as his ADC there. He served a staff and artillery officer with Napoleon in the Armee d'Italie. He was promoted to general of division in 1800 and was appointed as inspector-general of artillery in which capacity he served for two years. During his tenure the new artillery Systeme AN XI was 'discussed', argued over, and finally approved, though it never reached its intended purpose of replacing the older, sturdier Gribeauval System.
He did not make the first cut on the new marshal's list, but commanded II Corps in the 1805 campaign. He was assigned then as the civil and military governor of the new Dalmatian provinces and proved an able administrator, though there was suspicion which brought an imperial warning that he was not always 'clean-handed.'
Marmont was ordered north in 1809 and served in the Wagram campaign, but ignored Eugene's orders, desiring to maintain his independent command status. He was awarded his baton after Wagram, along with Macdonald and Oudinot. Together they could not replace Lannes.
He was assigned to replace Massena in Spain after Massena's failure there. 'He arrived with 300 horses, 100 red-liveried domestics, and a long train of vehicles. It was said that his entourage at as much fodder and food as a cavalry regiment. He did excellent work rebuilding Massena's former command but was badly wounded and defeated at Salamanca in 1812.
He missed the Russian campaign and fought well in 1813. His performance was uneven and he finally betrayed his corps to the allies.
It appears that Napoleon did quite a lot for Marmont-got him promoted to general of division and marshal, employed him continuously, and that was answered by Marmont with betrayal.
Marmont did contribute to the French language by adding the verb raguser (a play on his Napoleonic title-Duke of Ragusa), meaning to sneak, cheat, and betray.
Thanks for the link - looking forward to read it. The ingrate is Boney himself, - people like Marmont risked their life in endless war for him, but then in the end chose to be loyal to France and not any longer to a megalomaniac on a destruction course.
'The ingrate. He will be much unhappier than I.-Napoleon.