- Joined
- Apr 7, 2009
- Messages
- 18,347
- Reaction score
- 27,519
- Points
- 135
Very tough call, and I'm not sufficiently well-versed enough to make it.
On the side of Lannes, you have that he came from nothing, and was probably better at independent command than was Davout. Davout may have been better at the operational/tactical level. Aeurstadt was simply brilliant.
Almost word for word how I feel about it.
Lannes is certainly the more storied, romantic option - brought up from nothing, known for his courage and daring, fell in battle, and was perhaps the general closest to Napoleon himself on a personal level.
Davout was a brilliant tactician that defeated an army more than double the size of his. He was effective, but also remarkably cruel. In terms of ability, he was a strict, disciplined tactician that ran perhaps the tightest regiment of troops.
Also, @King Stannis for whatever reason I’m not notified when you tag me, only when you quote or react to my posts. Not sure why that is.