Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society 2019 - 2020 Napoleonic Memorabilia (Napoleonics) in the House of Blücher: “Hero of the Day” the Field Marshal Blücher and Napoleon´s Carriage from Waterloo at Raduň Chateau the Metternichs, Liechtensteins or Schwarzenbergs affected the historical events in the crucial moments of Napoleonic wars and reinforced its family prestige as well as their social status on the international scale.2 The Blücher family interest in napoleonics is supported by several exhibits associated with the Silesian Chateau of Raduň (Radun) located nearby Opava (Troppau) in the historical Czech Silesia in the current Czech Republic, not in Belarus or in Polish Wrocɫaw as often incorrectly stated (see Fig. 1). The Blücher family and their residency in the Czech lands represent the historical memory of Napoleonic times and primarily of year 1815. In the family memory a memory of a renowned family ancestor – the Prussian field marshal Gebhard Leberecht Blücher von Wahlstatt (1742-1819), who distinguished himself mainly in the last three years of Napoleonic wars, was revived. Blücher family received Raduň Chateau through marriage of his grandson Gebhard Bernhard Blücher von Wahlstatt (1799-1875) with the owner of the mansion Marie Larisch-Mönich (1801-1889) which took place October 29, 1832 in a spa resort Bad Warmbrunn at the foothills of the by Marian Hochel The richness and diversity of napoleonics deposited at Czech chateaus, managed by the National Heritage Institute in the Czech Republic, were mentioned in the study published in the previous issue of Napoleonic Scholarship.1 The role of the chosen noble families was brought to mind. Their members were engaged in high state positions, held significant military and diplomatic posts and were in direct contact with Napoleonic France. By doing so, they were strengthening their social status, boosted their influence on current affairs and were providing social prestige to their family. They were directly participating in the formation of the family memory where Napoleonic war events, in which these personalities participated, were permanently embedded. This was demonstrated not only by the selfpresentation of these partakers or of their descendants through works of art, but also through collectable artefacts which were directly related to Napoleonic wars. This study looks more closely at the noble family of the Blüchers which together with Marian Hochel, “Napoleonic Memorabilia as the Mediator of Historical Memory in Chateau Collections in Lands of the Bohemian Crown,” Napoleonic Scholarship. The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society 9 (December 2018): 51–77. This paper was made in terms of the Support of foreign mobility of academics and support of international relations among departments of the Faculty of Philosophy and Science of the Silesian University in Opava in 2019. 2 1 26 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society Krkonoše Mountains (Cieplice ŚląskieZdrój).3 The life story of a generally renowned Prussian marshal, who participated in the final military defeat of Napoleon Bonaparte, is an evidence of the fact that in the period called “between the times” or “the age of transitionˮ it was possible to build through one´s efforts and remarkable ambitions a career which surpassed boundaries and was permanently taken down into European history and collective memory. This year (2019) we commemorate the 200th anniversary of Marshal´s death. 2019 - 2020 battle of Freiberg in Saxony under the command of the Prussian prince Heinrich (1726-1802), the brother of the Prussian king Frederick II the Great. In 1770 Blücher was allocated to troops which guarded the Polish border. A year later, being dissatisfied for not getting another army promotion, he was asking for leave of absence in considerable length. Frederick II disliked his conduct and in 1773 Blücher was dismissed from the army. He married a daughter of the Polish royal guard officer and attended to finishing his mansion Groß-Radów.4 In 1784 he was appointed a nobility representative in the regency of the province Pomerania with its seat in Stargard. He took interest in Freemason predominantly in its ethical and humanitarian aspect. He joined the local Masonic Lodge and gradually became its respectable member. Despite his civil engagement, he had to re-join the Prussian army in 1787; the Prussian king Frederick William II appointed him the commander of the squadron of his former regiment in 1787. The same year Blücher participated in pacification of Dutch rebels, which he was asked to do by the local government. The revolutionary wars enabled him further promotion in his military career. In 1793-1794 he operated as a lieutenant colonel (lieutenant-colonel, Oberstleutnant) in the army of the Duke of Brunswick who was involved in fights with the French Gebhard Leberecht was born in Rostock to a family of Mecklenburg’s large landowners, in the current region of Mecklenburg – Western Pomerania on the coast of Baltic Sea. His theoretical education was not at a high level, he was educated by practice and mostly military one, where he was active as soon as the beginning of the seven years´ war. He and his brother joined the Swedish army and in 1758 were gradually appointed into the rank of a cornet (cornette) in the squadron of Hussars in a light cavalry. In 1760 he was captured by the troops of the Prussian army which he joined soon after that and drew attention to himself by great bravery. In 1762 he was appointed to second lieutenant (sous-lieutenant), later lieutenant (lieutenant) and that year he fought in the To the history of the family, see Friedrich Wigger, Geschichte der Familie von Blücher, I.–II. Band, (Schwerin, 1870-1879). 4 The first wife Karoline Amalie von Mehling (1756-1791) gave Blücher seven children. The second marriage of Blücher with Katharina Amalie von Colomb (1772-1850), whom she married in 1775, was childless. 3 27 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society 2019 - 2020 revolutionary army; Blücher was promoted to a major general (major-général, Generalmajor). He noted his experience from the war campaigns from 1793-1794 in the form of a diary and later published it under the title Campagne-Journal der Jahren 1793 u[nd]. 1794 (Berlin, 1796). After signing the peace treaty in Bâle in 1795 which ended the war of the first coalition in favour of France,5 in 1795 Blücher took the command of a special military unit responsible for supervision over respecting the neutrality in northGermanic regions. In 1801 he was appointed a lieutenant general (lieutenant general, Generalleutnant) and in 1802 he was assigned to occupy the Münster bishopric which was supposed to, considering the admission of the Principal Conclusion of the Extraordinary Imperial Delegation of the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation, recompense Prussia the losses made by annexations of the left bank of the Rhine by France.6 In 1803 the Prussian king appointed Blücher to a military governor of the city, upon the request of the episcopal authorities and the cathedral chapter in Münster, while Heinrich Friedrich Karl vom und zum Stein (1757-1831) took over the civil administration. Since then Blücher became for a long time a vigorous opponent of France and of Napoleon Bonaparte in particular, at the same time he identified himself with the Prussian state and accepted his identity. In 1805 he wrote up his memoir document (Pensées sur la formation d´une armée nationale) where he commented on the introduction of general and compulsory military service in Prussia. On October 14, 1806 he belonged to the defeated in the battle of Auerstaedt and organized a withdrawal of the rear guard of the army under the command of Friedrich Ludwig zu Hohenlohe-Ingelfingen (17461818). Nevertheless, not even the consecutive capitulating affected Blücher´s determination which he did not make secret and which resulted from his patriotic enthusiasm: “Our misery must strengthen us in our courage and our will.ˮ7 He was taken to Hamburg as a war prisoner where on March 8,1807 he was traded for a French general Claude-Victor Perrin (1764-1841) who was captured by Prussian troops. On 30 May 1807 Blücher landed with a special unit in Stralsund in Swedish Pomerania to try and support the Swedish troops; he took part in irrelevant fights which ended by peace on 21 June 1807. He was appointed the governor of Pomerania and New March (Neumark) and focused on the army reform. In 1809 he was unsuccessful in his try to make the Prussian king join Austria and the Allies of the Fifth coalition. Unlike the Based on the peace treaty signed between the French Republic and the Kingdom of Prussia on 5 April 1795, Prussia ceded the Rhine territories westward from Rhine to France. 6 Hauptausschluss der außerordentlichen Reichsdeputation – the resolution which was delivered at the assembley of the German Empire in Regensburg on February 25, 1803 about the liquidation of ecclesiastical principalities, secularisation of monasteries and media coverage of free imperial towns. 7 “Notre malheur doit uniquement nous renforcer dans notre courage et notre volonté.“ Roger Dufraisse, Blücher, in Jean Tulard (ed.), Dictionnaire Napoléon, I, (Paris, 1999), 252. 5 28 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society 2019 - 2020 with regards to their abilities it was, according to certain opinions, hard to judge objectively Blücher´s genuine military merits in the campaigns of the antiNapoleonic coalition.10 After the death or Scharnhorst in Prague, who died as a consequence of the wounds from the battle of Großgőrschen, Gneisenau was appointed the chief commander of Blücher´s headquarters. In the military operations they both preferred the policy of offense lead to extremes. Since August 1813 Blücher suggested to march to Paris whilst the Allies were not even considering this option. He repeated his intention after his victories on 26 August at Katzbach (Kaczawa), on 3 October, at Wartenberg (Wartenburg) and on 16 to 19 October at Leipzig, on the grounds of which he was appointed the Prussian supreme field marshal (Generalfeldmarschall). He deliberated a direct attack of Paris after the seizure of Kaub and liberated Rhine on the night of 31 December 1813. Blücher´s success on Rhine actually ended the French dominance of the Germanic countries and entered the German history as a significant milestone; in the world of art it became – just like the personality of the marshal – the motif processed in art (see Fig. 2). The event was spectacularly captured in 1859 by a famous German painter of historical and battle scenes Wilhelm Camphausen other patriots, he did not leave for exile and by that he expressed his disappointment. He asked for permission to retire but the Prussian king Frederick William III appointed him the chief commander of the cavalry and the canon of the cathedral in Magdeburg. As soon as in 1811 the French authorities requested that he is suspended and he had to leave Berlin. On 28 February 1813, when Prussia yet again raised their arms to fight against the French, Blücher took over the command of the troops operating in Silesia. He was subject to the command of the Russian army in terms of allied forces of the Sixth coalition; on 2 May, his troops were defeated by the French at the battle of Großgőrschen and on 20 and 21 May at the battle of Bautzen. After coming to truce in Pleisswitz (Pläswitz) on 4 June, he was appointed a supreme commander (général en chef) by the Allies of so-called Silesian army counting 100,000 men. This army consisted of 61,220 Russians with 236 cannons and 37,200 Prussians with 104 cannons.8 Blücher surrounded himself by very capable officers – Chief of the General Staff (chef d´état major général, Chef des Generalstabes) Gerhard Johann David von Scharnhorst (1755-1813) and Chief of the Main Staff (quartier-maȋtre général, Generalquartiermeister) August Neidhart von Gneisenau (1760-1831).9 Therefore Milan Švankmajer, Čechy na sklonku napoleonských válek 1810–1815 (Praha, 2004), 93. 9 Oskar Regele, Generalstabschefs aus 4 Jahrhunderten. Das Amt des Chefs des Generalstabes in der Donaumonarchie. Seine Träger und Organe von 1529 bis 1918 (Wien – München, 1966), 48–49. 10 Dufraisse, Blücher, in Tulard (ed.), Dictionnaire Napoléon, I, 252; and Lucian Regenbogen, Napoléon à dit. Aphorismes, citations et opinions (Paris, 2002), 291. 8 29 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society 2019 - 2020 Rothière he made the French retreat. Notwithstanding the numerous problems following his campaign, he did not succumb the appeals for a general withdrawal; his Silesian army marched together with the main part of the allied army to Paris and on March 30, Montmartre was conquered. Marshal was made to retire by his advancing eyesight disease accompanied by depression and psychic problems. “Bad physical condition of old Blücher,, commented the situation Clausewitz.13 On 2 January 1814 Blücher resigned on the executive post of the chief commander and on 3 June, he received a title of a prince ad personam from the Prussian king Frederick William III.14 Part of the promotion was an amendment of the coat of arms and the particle von Wahlstatt. In the princely diploma for Blücher amongst the merits we can read: “(…) Our memorable field marshal von Blücher, in his happy and fortunate end of the fights, has credits for the country and the great and holly Prussian and German issue and all the allied powers and also for Us and Our monarchy….ˮ15 On 11 November 1814 the monarch dedicated marshal Blücher secularized mansions Krieblowitz, (1818-1885)11 in his romantic concept. The second plan in the central part of the composition of his oil painting is dominated by marshal Blücher seated on a horse, facing the observer, captured with an eloquent gesture – with a pipe in his hand he is pointing to the chateau of Pfalzgrafenstein where he is directing his soldiers, he is challenging them to cross the Rhine and march to Paris. Blücher did not mean to withdraw or advance too carefully according to the plans which generalissimus Karl Philipp zu Schwarzenberg (1771-1820) was enforcing. Hans-Joachim Shoeps (2004) pointed out that the Prussian field marshal often rushed into battles individually and according to a renowned general, military strategist and theoretician of war Carl von Clausewitz (1780-1831) his Silesian army became “a steel spike of a heavy metal block which the colossus cleaved.ˮ12 Blücher and his army were mostly moving separately from the main part of the allied army on their campaign. The allied army was commanded by Schwarzenberg; in Brienne 29 January 1814 he had to withdraw, but on 1 February 1814 in La Geschichte eines Staates, [Berlin, 1966], translated by Šárka Stellnerová and František Stellner), 120. 13 Carl von Clausewitz, O válce, (Praha, 2008) (from the German original Vom Kriege, translated by Zbyněk Sekal), 215. 14 The title of a Duke spread onto all male members of the family on October 18, 1861. 15 Pavel Koblasa, Archiv knížat Blücher von Wahlstatt, in Rodopisná revue on-line, roč. 14, 2/2012, 4. Wilhelm Camphausen, Blüchers Rheinübergang mit der 1. Schlesischen Armee bei Kaub im Januar 1814 [translated – Crossing the Rhine by the Blücher Silesian army at Kaub on 1 January 1814], oil on canvas from 1859, Mittelrhein-Museum in Koblenz, Inv. No. M 489. Another version of Camphausen´s oil painting from 1860 is deposited in the collections of Staatliche Museen zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Nationalgalerie. 12 Hans-Joachim Schoeps, Dějiny Pruska, (Praha, 2004) (from the German original Preußen. 11 30 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society 2019 - 2020 when Gneisenau commanded the army to withdraw – but not to Rhine but north towards the town of Wavre (Waver). This enabled the chief Prussian field marshal Blücher hit the crucial moment on 18 June 1815 at the battle of Waterloo and help the chief commander of the allied forces Arthur Wellesley, the Duke of Wellington (17691852) in a close battle to reach the crucial victory. Blücher, not taking a rest, he marched to Paris this time which he entered on 3 July 1815.17 He was appointed by the Allies to the post of the army governor of the town intra muros. He was extremely harsh and vindictive towards the French; he treated them callously. In 1814 he made a threat to blow up Pont d´Ièna.18 He was dissatisfied with the wording of the second Parisian peace treaty which was, according to him, too gentle towards the French. When the Napoleonic wars finished he travelled between his mansion Krieblowicz (Krobielowice) near Wrocɫaw (Breslau), spas Carlsbad (Karlovy Vary, Karlsbad), where he sought treatment, and Berlin, where he was offered a grand neo-classicist palace on the corner of Pariser Platz Nr. 2 and Königgrätzer Straße Nr. 140 at the very proximity of Branderburg Gate by king Frederick William III for his loyal service and merits in Napoleonic wars, especially at Zirkwitz, Groß-Zauche, Tarnast, Schawoyne and Lutzine in the Prussian Silesia. The local territorial possessions amounted the surface area of 1,337 hectares.16 Blücher monitored the developments at the Congress of Vienna and was dissatisfied with its decisions which according to him did not take into account the Prussian interests. Being invited by the prince regent, the future-to-be king of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and the king of Hanover George IV, he left for England where he received a warm welcome; the University of Oxford awarded him with a certificate of merit doctor honoris causa. Napoleon´s return from the island of Elba mobilized the old marshal and he yet again returned onto the scene into the front lines of anti-Napoleonic coalition. He was appointed the chief commander of the Prussian army whereas Gneisenau was chosen for the Chief of his Staff. One of the first tasks which Blücher had to fulfil was to supress the rebellion of Saxon troops in Liège at the beginning of May 1815. When Napoleon appeared in Belgium, Blücher tried to stop him at Ligny but on 16 June 1815 he was defeated. It was the last Napoleon´s victory. It was then the Emperor Napoleon I in 1807 in tribute to his victory over the Prussian army at the battle of Jena on 14 October 1806. The French politician and diplomat Charles-Maurice de TalleyrandPérigord (1754-1838) managed to rescue the bridge. For more details see Emmanuel de Waresquiel, Talleyrand. Le prince immobile (Fayard, 2006), 508–09. Ibid. To Blücher´s war merits in crucial moments of the Napoleonic wars in 1813-1815 for more detail see Frank Bauer, Gebhard Leberecht von Blücher. Der Volksheld der Befreiungskriege 1813-1815 [Kleine Reihe Geschichte der Befreiungskriege 1813-1815, Sonderheft 7], (Potsdam, 2010). 18 The construction of the Pont d´Iéna over the river Seina was order by his decree from Warsaw 16 17 31 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society the battle of Waterloo.19 In 1817 Blücher was appointed a member of the Prussian State Council whose meeting he took part in every day.20 He died on 12 September 1819 at his Silesian mansion Krieblowitz where his persona is commemorated by a mausoleum with a family tomb.21 2019 - 2020 dedication at war, however, he despised his commander skills: Blücher is a very brave soldier, a fine hotshot [(sabreur)]. He is like a bull which closes its eyes and rushes ahead not seeing the danger. He made millions of mistakes and were it not for the circumstances, he would have imprisoned him on several occasions just like many on his army. He is persistent, tireless, and fearless and he is really devoted to his homeland; but he has no talent for being a general.ˮ23 Long after his death, there appeared various views of his commander qualities. Napoleon himself doubted them. He remembered the Prussian marshal when he was on the island of Saint Helena in relation with several war campaigns as his companions Emmanuel de Las Cases (17661842), Gaspard Gourgaud (1783-1852) and also Henri-Gatien Bertrand (1773-1844) recorded in their memoirs.22 In 1817 Napoleon told the English surgeon Barry Edward O´Meara (1785-1836) that he valued Blücher´s determination and The Prussian war theoretician and analyst of war strategies Clausewitz valued Blücher´s initiative rather than his commander skills, which was to a certain extent what he agreed on with Napoleon: “Although being weaker that Schwarzenberg, Blücher was a more Geschichte Berlins, 88. Jahrgang, Heft 4, Oktober 1992, 79–88. 22 Emmanuel de Las Cases, Mémorial de SainteHélène (Points no 677: Éditions du Seuil, 1999), I: 55 and 543; Emmanuel de Las Cases, Mémorial de Sainte-Hélène (Points no 678: Éditions du Seuil, 2008), II: 920, 1145, 1148, 1150, 1151, 1183, 1233, 1471, and 1514; Jean Tulard (ed.), Napoléon à Sainte-Hélène. Par les quatre évangelistes Las Cases, Montholon, Gourgaud, Bertrand, (Paris, 2012 [1981]), 267, 539, and 617. 23 „Blücher est un très brave soldat, un bon sabreur. Cʼest comme un taureau qui ferme les yeux et se précipite en avant sans voir aucun danger. Il a commis des millions de fautes et, sʼil nʼeût été servi par les circonstances, jʼaurais pu différentes fois le faire prisonnier, ainsi que la plus grande partie de son armée. Il est opiniâtre et infatigable, nʼa peur de rien et est très attaché à son pays; mais, comme général, il est sans talent.“ Regenbogen, Napoléon à dit, 290. The buiding of the palace was damaged seriously at the end of the Second World War and in 1957 it was taken down. 20 To the biography of the field marshal Blücher see Wilhelm Burckhardt, Gebhard Leberecht v[on]. Blücher, preussischer Feldmarschall und Fürst von Wahlstatt: Nach Leben, Reden und Thaten geschildert, (Stuttgart, 1835); Tom Crepon, Leberecht von Blücher. Leben und Kämpfe. Biografie, (Berlin, 1988); Hans Haussherr, Blücher von Wahlstatt, Gebhard Leberecht Fürst. In Neue Deutsche Biographie (NDB). Band 2, (Berlin, 1955), 317– 319; Wolf Karge (ed.), Gebhard Leberecht von Blücher und seine Zeit, (Rostock, 1992); Michael V. LEGGIERE, Blücher. Scourge of Napoleon, (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2014); and Johannes Ssherr, Blücher: Seine Zeit und sein Leben, Zehn Bände in drei Abtheilungen, I-III, (Leipzig, 1887). 21 Jörg Kuhn, Das Mausoleum Blüchers in Krieblowitz, in Mitteilungen des Vereins für die 19 32 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society 2019 - 2020 events of 1815 in his memoirs, published post-mortem under the heading “Memoirs from Beyond the Graveˮ (Mémoires d´outretombe), by the famous writer and politician and the pioneer of the French romanticism François-René de Chateaubriand (17681848): significant opponent due to his initiative, and so the centre of power was rather within him and it carries along everything else.ˮ24 Hence according to Clausewitz if the Russian general Michail Barclay de Tolly (1761-1818) had headed up the Silesian army in 1814 instead of the initiative Blücher and Blücher would have stayed in the central army under the command of Schwarzenberg, the field march would have ended up in failure.25 Clausewitz also drew attention to the fact that it was Bonaparte who Around Malmaison the Prussians were lying in wait, Blücher, drunk by wine, stumbling, was commanding to take hold of Bonaparte, to hang the conqueror who was stepping the kings on their necks. I am afraid the rate of fate, rudeness of manners and the rapidity of rise and fall of today´s heroes will deprive our times of the nobility of history: Greece and Rome did not clamour to hang Alexander [Macedonian] or Caesar.27 absolutely nowhere assessed the initiative of old Blücher. It was only at Leipzig where he defeated him; at Laon he could have destroyed him and the fact it did not happen was down to the circumstances Bonaparte could not allow for; finally at Belle-Alliance he stroke him down like a destructive lightning.26 Despite all his vices, Blücher became a folk hero of liberating wars. As the commander of the Prussian army he had, apart from Wellington in Belgium, a major merit in the victories of the war which was related to as the “Great,ˮ lead for freedom against Napoleon I and the “French invaders.ˮ It was Blücher who took part in victories of Allies in the “Battle of Nationsˮ at Leipzig and in 1815 at the crucial moment he Blücher´s “(a spirit of) initiativeˮ was in the eyes of his contemporaries balanced by his sharp temperament, rudeness and vindictiveness. The vices of the Prussian field marshal for which he was notorious for, were mentioned in relation to the conquérant qui avait mis le pied sur le cou des rois. La rapidité des fortunes, la vulgarité des mœurs, la promptitude de lʼélévation et de lʼabaissement des personnages modernes ôtera, je le crains, à notre temps, une partie de la noblesse de lʼhistoire: Rome et la Grèce nʼont point parlé de pendre Alexandre et César.“ François-René de Chateaubriand, Mémoires d’outre-tombe, Tome quatrième, (Paris, 1860), 31. Clausewitz, O válce, 114. Clausewitz, O válce, 581. 26 Clausewitz, O válce, 470. 27 François-René de Chateaubriand, Paměti ze záhrobí (from the French original Mémoires d’outretombe, [Paris, 1989-1998], translated by Aleš Pohorský), (Praha, 2011), s. 353. V původním znění viz: „(…) les Prussiens rôdaient dans la voisinage de la Malmaison; Blücher, aviné, ordonnait en trébuchant de saisir, de pendre le 24 25 33 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society rushed to help the Allies to contribute to the final defeat of Napoleon at the battle of Waterloo on 18 June. The term “Waterlooˮ actually went down in history as the synonym to a total military disaster.28 For Blücher the term did not have a pejorative meaning, on the contrary—it sparkled his name, it gave his name recognition and social prestige. He received an honorary epithet “Marshal Forwardˮ (Marschall Vorwärts).29 It was Blücher himself, known for his personal and also commander strength who drove his soldiers forward disregarding other Allies´ fleets, which often turned out to be a tactical and strategic error.30 Despite this, Napoleon recognized his significance when during the internment on the island of Saint Helena in November 1816 admitted that Wellington could not win had it not been for Blücher: 2019 - 2020 they call him, would be; but I would most certainly not be here.31 What is certain though is that Napoleon´s name kept alive alongside with the name of the Prussian marshal, a famous predecessor of the family and Napoleon´s defeater, in what the Blücher family remembers and after the final defeat of the French Emperor and his exile, as well as one of the war trophies in the shape of Napoleonic memorabilia (napoleonicum, objet napoléonien) was kept in the property of the family. Its historical and monument value was confirmed at the moment of its acquisition. In the victorious battle at Waterloo, the Prussians acquired Napoleon´s carriage which was prepared at Genappe and marshal Blücher had this capture moved to his mansion Wahlstatt (Legnickie Pole). Later the carriage was transferred to the mansion Krieblowicz (Krobielowice) in the Prussian Silesia where the famous marshal was buried. Gebhard Leberecht, the 3rd duke of Blücher family (1836-1916), had the carriage moved to Raduň. In his request dated 30 January 1901, about the duty-free transfer of several carriages from the family´s mansion on the German land (Krieblowitz) to his summer I am being reassured, (…) that it is because of him I am here and I believe it. (…) My fall and fate which I was predetermined to provided him with big fame and also to all his victories and yet he doubted that. Ah! He owes a beautiful candle to the old Blücher: had it not been for him, I do not know where His Grace, as „On mʼassure (…) que cʼest par lui que je suis ici, et je le crois. (…) Ma chute et le sort quʼon me réservait lui ménageaient une gloire bien supérieure encore à toutes ses victoires, et il ne sʼen est pas douté. Ah! quʼil doit un beau cierge au vieux Blücher: sans celui-là je ne sais pas où serait Sa Grace, ainsi quʼils lʼappellent; mais moi, bien sûrement, je ne serais pas ici.“ Las Cases, Mémorial de Sainte-Hélène, I: 1514. Pavel BĚLINA, Napoleonské války – předěl v dějinách mezinárodních vztahů a vojenského umění, in Ivan ŠEDIVÝ, Pavel BĚLINA, Jan VILÍM, and Jan Vlk (eds.), Napoleonské války a české země, (Praha, 2001), 43. 29 Clauswitz, O válce, s. 705; and Schoeps, Dějiny Pruska, 120. 30 Petr Havel – Andrej ROMAŇÁK, Radeckého působení v čele generálních štábů (1809–1815), in ŠEDIVÝ – BĚLINA – VILÍM – VLK (eds.), Napoleonské války a české země, 154. 31 28 34 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society 2019 - 2020 would accept [Napoleon´s carriage as a coronation gift] and that some label like the one enclosed be attached to it. (…) It is the identical carriage out of which Napoleon jumped after the battle of Waterloo leaving his hat, coat and sword inside (…).ˮ33 Nevertheless, the circumstances did not allow for this to happen. In 1913 the carriage was, together with other napoleonics, exhibited in Wrocɫaw at the occasion of centennial anniversary of the victory of anti-Napoleonic coalition (Austria, Prussia, Russia, Great Britain and Sweden) at the “Battle of Nationsˮ at Leipzig.34 residency on the Austrian side of the border (Raduň), he mentioned “at the mansion Krieblowitz the carriage of Napoleon I which my great-grandfather field marshal Blücher captured after the French fleeing after the battle of Waterloo in 1815.ˮ32 The Blücher family cherished Napoleon´s carriage of the berlin type (landau en berline) as a precious relic. It was to commemorate the heroic act of their renowned predecessor, a war trophy but also a relic from 1815 symbolizing the epoch of the “great historyˮ when marshal Blücher became famous. From the symbolic meaning and historical value of this family relic, which as time went gained the estimated price, was also derived its museum value. It was actually tested by time. In 1916-1926 there was a very dramatic dispute between marshal´s great-grandsons Gebhard, the 4th Duke Blücher von Wahlstatt (1865-1931), who planned to transfer the carriage to his German estate, and his younger brother from his father´s second marriage Count Lothar (1890-1928) who in 1912 gained Raduň´s mansion of the area of 1,587 hectares with the chateau and all the facilities who wanted the carriage to stay where it was. The younger of the two, Lothar, argued during the lawsuit that he received the carriage from his father as a gift, however, he lost the lengthy dispute. Yet he locked the carriage at the basement depot of the House of Officials in the Raduň Chateau and he refused to hand it over to the court officials. A dramatic sibling In 1902, with regards to the wealthy contacts in Great Britain which were ongoing since the times of the renowned field marshal Blücher, the family considered giving the carriage to king Edward VII (1841-1910), the king of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, the Emperor of India, from the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha (Haus Sachsen-Coburg-Gotha), at the occasion of his coronation. The British military attaché in Berlin wrote to the personal secretary of the king: “[Duke Gebhard Leberecht von Blücher] would be very pleased if the King Céline Meunier, Le landau en berline de Napoléon, in Jean Tulard (ed.), La Berline de Napoléon. Les mystères du butin de Waterloo, (Paris, 2012), 70. 34 Eva KOLÁŘOVÁ, Příběh raduňského zámku, (Kroměříž, 2015), 70. 33 Anthony de la Pour, „Phaeton Chariot(s): The Mystery of Napoleonʾs Waterloo Carriage,” The Carriage Journal 29 (Spring 1992): 158. 32 35 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society Count Lothar had no intention to surrender, he locked the carriage in the House of Officials in the Raduň Chateau and according to the recollections of oldtimers he even protected this family memorabilia using a gun with blank cartridges. Ten years from filing the lawsuit the State Heritage Office for Moravia and Silesia informed the attorney of Duke Gebhard on 13 August 1926 that the Ministry of Education and National Edification allowed the Heritage Office to issue a permit for an export of the carriage on the condition that the office receives photographs of the carriage in the size of 18 x 24 taken from different angles, three copies of each. It was clear to everyone that the photographs could not be taken in advance. The written communication between the attorneys was suggesting that the relations between Count Lothar and Duke Gebhard are very tense, so for that reason it would be appropriate to withdraw the carriage on the execution basis and make the photographs inland. The attorney of Count Gebhard was supposed to take the carriage over on 20 October 1926 and manage all that was needed. The exact time of the export of the carriage is not documented and the old-timers evidence varies. One thing is clear though – the significance and museum value of Napoleon´s carriage was known to everybody in spite of incomplete and sometimes misinterpreted information which spread with this lawsuit. dispute over a valuable Napoleonic memorabilia at an estimated cost of one hundred thousand Czechoslovak crowns commented on the period journal prompted the State Heritage Office for Moravia and Silesia on 23 December 1924 to send a letter addressed to the Raduň estate direction, saying that “the Office was warned by journal news that the so-called Napoleonʼs carriage, deposited in Raduň, is to be taken to Germany for the intervention of a bailiff.”35 The preserved concept of the manuscript response confirms that the carriage is actually to be delivered by court judgment, but it is not known “whether and when it will be. It would be good if the export of this carriage, which is very well hidden in Raduň, was banned by the authorities.ˮ36 At the same time, the unknown writer of this manuscript pleaded for an early intervention. This also happened, because on 4 February 1925 the State Heritage Office announced to the General Direction of the Blücher Estates in Bravantice that, according to the law, “the export of all artistic and historical monuments is prohibited and only rarely is such an export permitted. Napoleonʼs carriage is one of the valuable monuments and it is therefore necessary to present everything to export to the State Heritage Office and ask for a possible permit.”37 However, Prince Gebhard defended against this statement and argued that this was not an export, but only a transport of the carriage to his own residence. Nevertheless, 35 36 2019 - 2020 KOLÁŘOVÁ, Příběh raduňského zámku, 106. KOLÁŘOVÁ, Příběh raduňského zámku, 106. 37 36 KOLÁŘOVÁ, Příběh raduňského zámku, 107. Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society To give an example, a teacher of Czech who taught the last generation of Raduň Blücher family Jan Hykl remembered a statement of his student Hugo Blücher von Wahlstatt (1913-1948), the son of Count Lothar that the family sold the carriage in 1932 to France because they were in need of money to pay for central heating at the chateau. A former Opava police managing director Jan Wiedermann left a different testimony: assumed that it was Napoleon´s carriage captured at the battle of Leipzig in 1813.40 Only one historical photograph of Napoleon´s carriage on a cardboard is preserved at Raduň Chateau. It was bought out into the local collections in 1992 from a private possession (see Fig. 3). It was originally assumed that it was taken in 1920 in front of the House of Officials at Raduň Chateau.41 A more probable variant, however, is that it was made earlier – soon after the carriage was transferred on 2 March 1901 from Prussian Krobielowice to Raduň via Krnov. The photograph was taken by an Opavian photographer Florian Gödel (1956-1916) who was popular with Opava nobility as a documentary photographer of interiors and exteriors of noble homes.42 The carriage was stored as part of Blüchers´ property at the Silesian chateau in Raduň near Opava. In 1927 the carriage was released to German government on the basis of their request. Before it was released to Germany, I had the carriage photographed to the order of at that time Land Silesian President Josef Šrámek. I kept two photos as souvenirs.38 However, what happened to Napoleon´s carriage after the lawsuit finished? It is sure that it was transferred from Raduň in 1934 and displayed as one of the crucial exhibits at the exhibition in Arsenal (Zeughaus) in Berlin.43 The exhibition which was called “Blücher´s prayˮ (Die Blücher-Beute), took over the same concept which was adopted They were then in 1961 dedicated as part of his inheritance to the historical site of the Silesian Museum in Opava by Jaroslav Wiedermann.39 A former police director Wiedermann, however, mistakenly 38 2019 - 2020 Jiří ŠÍL and Eva KOLÁŘOVÁ, Kočár, který ukořistil hrabě Gebhart Blücher po bitvě u Waterloo, in Ilona Matejko-Pererka (ed.), Země a její pán. Struktury vlády a její projevy na území Rakouského Slezska do konce první světové války, (Opava, 2014), 370, Cat. No. B4-32. 42 KOLÁŘOVÁ, Příběh raduňského zámku, 70. 43 Robert von Arnoldi, Une relique touchante, compte rendu de lʼexposition du Zeughaus, 1934, musée militaire de Berlin, in Revue des études napoléoniennes, XXVIIe année, tome XLV, juillet – décembre 1939, 230–231. KOLÁŘOVÁ, Příběh raduňského zámku, 107- 41 08. 39 Both photographs are in the historical subcollection of the Silesian Museum in Opava, Inv. No. M 103/1-2. 40 Jiří ŠÍL and Eva KOLÁŘOVÁ, Kočár, který ukořistil hrabě Gebhart Blücher po bitvě u Waterloo, in Ilona Matejko-Pererka (ed.), Země a její pán. Struktury vlády a její projevy na území Rakouského Slezska do konce první světové války, (Opava, 2014), 370, Cat. No. B4-32. 37 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society 2019 - 2020 battle of Waterloo, coming from the property of Duke Blücher, at the National museum at Malmaison Chateau. After the period of five years from signing this contract, the carriage will become the property of the French state with the reservation of the advisory committee and the art committee of the national museums.45 at the exhibition in Wrocɫaw (Breslau) in 1913. Artefacts that the Berlin Arsenal managed to gather were supposed to present symbolically “the victory of Germany over Franceˮ and it met with a great resonance. Until 1973 when Napoleon´s carriage of the landau type was lent to the Malmaison Chateau, it was not presented to the public.44 After 1944, as a result of the Second World War, it was evacuated to the south and kept by the family of Fürstenbergs in Donaueschingen currently in the State of Germany BadenWürttemberg. The Blüchers owned Napoleon´s carriage from Waterloo for more than 150 years before they decided to return it to the French. First, the heir of the renowned marshal considered selling the carriage into the collections of the local museum but eventually he agreed only with a lending. According to the contract of the deposition from 6 August 1793, concluded between the Duke Blücher and the French state: Duke Blücher hereby declares the deposition of the carriage called landau, part of Emperor Napoleon I equipment, gained in the evening of June 18, 1815 in Genappe by the troops of Duke Blücher after the For it to be absolutely clear from the article that it is only a deposition with the commitment of a gift, the last part of the text was adjusted on 31 October 1973, respectively abridged into this form: “After the period of five years from signing this contract, the carriage will become the full property of the French state.ˮ On that day at 11 o´clock an official ceremony was held, where Napoleon´s carriage which arrived to Malmaison in a good shape on 17 October 1973 was passed over.46 Duke Blücher and his daughter were present at the ceremony, together with the general director of the museums of France (directeur des Musées de France), members of the board of governors of Conseil dʼadministration de la société des amis de Malmaison, His Emperor Highness Prince Napoleon, prince and princess Murats and princess Eugénie of Greece. The Michael Autengruber and Laurence Wodey, Histoire du « butin de Blücher », in Tulard (ed.), La Berline de Napoléon, 106. 45„Le comte Blücher déclare par le présente déposer au Musée National du château de Malmaison la voiture, dite landau, des équipages de lʼEmpereur Napoléon Ier, prise à Genappe, au soir du 18 Juin 1815, par les troupes du prince Blücher, après la bataille de Waterloo, provenant de la succession du prince Blücher. À lʼexpiration dʼun délai de cinq ans, à dater de la signature du présent contrat, la voiture deviendra pleine propriété de lʼÉtat français sous réserve de lʼagrément du comité consultatif et du conseil artistique de la réunion des musées nationaux.“ Meunier, Le landau en berline de Napoléon, in Tulard (ed.), La Berline de Napoléon, 70. 46 Gérard Hubert, Un précieux dépôt entre à Malmaison, in Revue du Souvenir napoléonien, 273 (janvier 1974): 22–23. 44 38 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society 2019 - 2020 ceremonial reception with the commitment of a significant acquisition for the local museum had great resonance in press and also on television. The conservator of the museum received a great number of letters from enthusiasts but at the same time from biting critics pointing out the fact that the carriage is not genuine. The former principal conservator (conservateur en chef) at the Compiègne Chateau, Max Terrier, in relation to the published article in Revue du Louvre where he explained all the important circumstances and evidence reassured that it most certainly is one of Napoleon´s carriages.47 After Duke Blücher´s death in June 1975 (he died aged 75), the advisory committee of the national museums approved of the acquisition of the carriage which became part of the French national collections at the museum at Malmaison Chateau (see Fig. 4).48 It was lent to the United States of America to an exhibition dedicated to Napoleon which took place in Memphis in 1993.49 In 2012 a special exhibition was dedicated to Napoleon´s carriage. It was held at the National museum of the Legion of Honour and of orders of chivalry (Musée national de la Légion d'honneur et des ordres de chevalerie) in Paris.50 It was in that year, 2012, when a bicentenary anniversary of the production of this carriage was commemorated. The carriage was originally intended for Napoleon´s Russian campaign. Max Terrier, Le landau de Napoléon et son histoire, in La revue du Louvre et des musées de France, 1975, N°2, 105–116. 48 Rueil-Malmaison, Musée national des châteaux de Malmaison et Bois-Préau, Inv. No. M.M.75.12.1. 49 Meunier, Le landau en berline de Napoléon, in Tulard (ed.), La Berline de Napoléon, 71. 50 Laurent Ottavi, Le butin de Waterloo reconstitué au musée de la Légion d’honneur, on-line: https://www.napoleon.org/histoire-des-2empires/articles/le-butin-de-waterloo-reconstitueau-musee-de-la-legion-dhonneur/, cit. 2. 11. 2019. In more detail to the preparations of this campaign see François Houdecek, La Grande Armée de 1812: organisation à lʼentrée en campagne, (Paris, 2012); Frédéric Masson, Composition et organisation des équipages de guerre de lʼempereur Napoléon en 1812, in Carnet de la Sabretache, vol. 2, 1894, 9. 52 Alphonse Maze-Sencier, Les fournisseurs de Napoléon 1er et des deux Impératrices d'après des documents inédits tirés des Archives nationales, des archives du Ministère des affaires étrangères et des archives des Manufactures de Sèvres et des Gobelins, (Paris, 1893), 111. The light carriage of the landau en berline type was order for Napoleon I on 1 January 1812; it was made together with other eight carriages by court carriage builders Cauyette and Getting whose workshop on rue des Martyrs was commissioned to prepare the carriages for the Russian campaign.51 However, on the day of Emperor´s departure on 9 May 1812, the carriage was not ready. It was delivered to the House of Emperor (Maison de l´Empereur) on 12 June, and it cost 11,561 francs and it reached the imperial staff in Vilnius.52 It was not his first imperial order for Getting—he also made, for instance, the coronation carriage and elegant carriages used at the marriage ceremony with the archduchess Marie Louise in 1810. On the carriage, currently deposited in the carriage house at Malmaison Chateau, there can also be found Getting´s production label with 51 47 39 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society 2019 - 2020 during the journey. The bonnet was extensible, the windows could be lowered and so the carriage could ride open. This enabled the Emperor to watch the horizon or communicate with the people who accompanied him on horses or on the other hand he could keep privacy and work or take a rest in the interior. There was storage space which was of an advantage – the front one on the axle for the case with Emperor´s foldable field bed, the back one in the interior for a vanity case (nécessaire) and a case for bottles of wine or liqueurs. The lanterns, which provided sophisticated lighting, did not survive.53 numbers 429 and 301 which he was assigned by the Master of the Horse (Grand écuyer) Armand de Caulaincourt (1773-1827) and which refer to the general register of imperial stables (Écuries impérials). The axle of the carriage was painted amaranth red and the grooves were gilded, the panneaux on the cabin were painted dark red, the cabin was also gilded and decorated with ornamental leaf borders. The cabin curtains were decorated with the state coat of arms of the First Empire, topped by the imperial crown. The composition is elegantly complemented by little imperial crowns. The cabin has a comfortable English form based on the latest fashion style to provide with more comfort; it was especially adjusted for Napoleon I while the axle remained robust, it was constructed by French carriage builders but made from English components which enabled to turn the carriage in 90 degrees. The doors, with wider windows than was common in carriages of this type, opened wide and were watertight. The leather sack at the front part of the carriage could change shape into a bed and the Emperor could take a rest The carriage was used during the Russian campaign, it avoided catastrophes which followed the haul and it again drove out on 10 June1815 to serve the Emperor. On 17 June, it was probably at the mansion Caillou with other equipment and on June 18, on the day of the crucial battle, the carriages remained gathered except for one carriage of the dormeuse type. This carriage was left near the battle field and got caught in mud when driving into Genappe before it was seized by the Prussian major Heinrich Eugen von Keller (1783-1842).54 The Later this carriage was transferred to London where it was, in 1816, exhibited before it was destroyed. It burnt during a massive fire in Madame Tussauds Museum in 1925. There only remained the axle which was in the collections of Malmaison Chateau in 1975, Inv. No. M.M.D.26.1, and six keys to this carriage which the premier piquer and Napoleon´s cocher Achille ThomasL’Union Archambault (1792-1858) took with him, Inv. No. M.M.40.47.4687–4692. Jehanne Lazaj (ed.), Le bivouac de Napoléon. Luxe impérial en campagne, (Ajaccio – Milan, 2014), 22–23; Céline Meunier, Berline de Waterloo, in Bernard Chevallier (ed.), Musée national des châteaux de Malmaison et Bois-Préau, (Paris, 2006), 98–99; Meunier, Le landau en berline de Napoléon, in Tulard (ed.), La Berline de Napoléon, 67; Thierry Lentz, La prise des voitures de Napoléon par les Prussiens au soir de Waterloo, in Tulard (ed.), La Berline de Napoléon, 55–66; and Xavier Aiolfi, Après tout, je ne suis qu’un homme… Napoléon intime, (Paris, 2008), 172–74. 54 53 40 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society 2019 - 2020 carriage of the landau type, Emperor´s personal carriage, drove out of Caillou with the other carriages on the orders of general Étienne Radet (1762-1825), the Grand Provost of the Central Headquarters (grand prévȏt du quartier général), due to their momentary needlessness. The convoy set on towards Genappe where it was unyoked and awaited other orders.55 Napoleon, when the battle was decided, made orders, as the imperial etiquette ordered, to yoke his landau, the light type of the carriage with the foldable bonnet for a quick movement between two wings of the army or two scenes of the battle. However, the circumstances did not allow for him to leave in the carriage. He played for time. Not to be captured, before the arrival of the Prussian soldiers, he got out of the carriage and continued on a horseback. Several cavaliers helped him to make his way out. It was the night from 18-19 June 1815. His landau was seized – just like other four carriages of the House of Emperor – raided by the Prussian troops of the 15th Infantry Regiment in direct proximity of Genappe without knowing then of its extraordinary importance.56 The seized carriages were gathered nearby Villers on 20 June 1815 whilst the carriage of the dormeuse type was taken to QuatreBras by Keller. The general had it transferred from there to Düsseldorf where his wife, baroness von Keller, was awaiting it.57 On the same day the field marshal Blücher, the chief commander of the Prussian army, captured the carriage of the landau type. He was convinced it could be the carriage in which Napoleon was almost captured and where there allegedly were his personal things and other valuables. He rewarded the soldiers who handed the war trophy over to him on the morning of 9 June 1815 “as a sign of the most gracious respect and remembrances of the great pursuit,ˮ58 and in a letter from the battlefield of Belle-Alliance he informed his wife that “[Napoleon´s] medal decorations which [the Emperor] wore were just handed over to me. There were seized in one of his carriages.ˮ59 Report of Radet, 19 June 1815, quoted in Jean Thiery, Waterloo, (Berger-Levrault, 1943), 245. 56 Cavalrymen of the 2nd squadron of Branderburg Uhlans, their commander was lieutenant Golz and the battalion of fusiliers of 25th Infantry Regiment under the command of major von Witzleben soon joined the fusiliers of 15th infantry regiment together with captain von Humbracht under the command of general von Keller. 57 Meunier, Le landau en berline de Napoléon, in Tulard (ed.), La Berline de Napoléon, 67. „…als Zeichen der ehrerbietigsten Verehrung und Gedenkzeichen an die ruhmvolle Verfolgung (…).“ E[rnst]. H[einrich]. Ludwig Stawitzky, Geschichte des Königlich Preussischen 25sten Infanterie-Regiments und seines Stammes, der Infanterie des von Lützow'schen Frei-Corps, (Koblenz, 1857), 104. 59 „…Seine Orden die er selbst getragen sind mich soeben gebracht. Sie sind in einen seiner Wagen genom, (…).“ Enno von COLOMB (ed.), Blücher in Briefen aus den Feldzügen 1813-1815, (Stuttgart, 1876); Brief LV., Schlachtfeld la Bellealiance, sine dat., 150. 55 58 41 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society 2019 - 2020 heaven itself knows where [he has gone].”61 On 20 June 1815,60 Napoleon's landau carriage was to be seized by Blücher who was moving between Gosselies and Soiresur-Sambre. As a “Hero of the Day” intoxicated by pride from the final victory over Napoleon, he sent his wife Katharina Amalia (1772-1850) an exaggerated message: The field marshal was not satisfied only with material booty. The reputation of the French Emperor as an invincible commander was long shaken, therefore Blücher decided to attack against a more sensitive point and win a major trophy – Napoleon's honour. He was not there when the Prussian troops looted the captured carriages of the French Emperor, his house and staff, nor could he know that the hat, coat, and sword, as well as captured medals and other valuables, had not been in the seized landau carriage. Therefore he spread an even more fictitious version of this untrue story, which was supposed to spread across Europe and amaze by his dramatic fable: the moment the Emperor stepped out on the footstool of his carriage, the Prussian officer reportedly stepped over the opposite door; Napoleon frightened of an unexpected encounter with such a fearsome adversary, the loser fled, losing his hat and his sword. Blücher ordered the Chief of his General Staff, August Neidhardt von Gneisenau (1760–1831) to include this story Napoleon fled at night without his hat and sword. I will send the hat and sword today to the king; his richly decorated ceremonial coat [and his] carriage are in my possession, as well as his field-glass he watched us through on the day of battle; I will send you the carriage, it is a pity that it was greatly damaged; all his treasures and precious items have become the booty of our troops, there was nothing left of his equipment; many soldiers shared 5– 6000 thalers of the booty; [Napoleon] was in his carriage to withdraw when he was surprised by our troops, he fired from there, mounted a horse without a sword, let his hat fall, and escaped protected by the night, but beschädigt ist, seine Juwelen und alle seine Preciosen sind unseren Truppen zur Beute geworden, von seiner Equipage ist ihm nichts geblieben, mancher Soldat hat 5–6000 Thlr. Beute gemacht, er war im Wagen um sich zurückzubegeben, als er von unseren Truppen überrascht wurde, er sprang heraus, warf sich ohne Degen zu Pferde, wobei ihm der Hut abgefallen, und so ist er wahrscheinlich durch die Nacht begünstigt entkommen, aber der Himmel weiß, wohin. (…)“ Colomb(ed.), Blücher in Briefen; Brief LVI., Gosselies den 25. Juni 1815, (Dictirt.), 151– 152. The dating of the letter of June 20, 1815, is mentioned in a re-edition of Blücher’s Correspondence of 1913 (Blüchers Briefe, vervollständigte Sammlung des Generals E[nno]). v[on]. Colomb; hrsg. von W[olfgang]. v[on]. Unger, [Stuttgart, 1913]), in the original edition of 1876 the letter’s date is on June 25, 1815 in Gosselies. 61 „(…) Napoleon ist in der Nacht ohne Hut und Degen entwischt, seinen Hut und [seinen] Degen schicke ich heute am König, sein überaus Reicher Staatsmantel, sein Wagen sind in meinen Händen, auch sein Perspektiv, wodurch er uns am Schlachttage beseh[e]n, besitze ich; den Wagen will ich dir schicken, es ist nur Schade, daß er 60 42 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society 2019 - 2020 Emperor. It was understandable; they lived in a turbulent time of wars and heroes, and now they were claiming to enjoy Napoleon's bask in the glory. They wrote their letters and memoirs to tell the world: "I was there.” The captured war trophies, valuables and personal items of Napoleon and his imperial house, Napoleonic Memorabilia, guardians of historical memory, kept in their dwellings and presented at jubilee exhibitions were to be their witnesses. As Michael Autengruber and Laurence Wodey (2012) pointed out, "the legend also demanded that all the booty be found in the Emperor's car, as this increased the charm of the items and the prestige of their new owners.”65 Indeed, history has always been used to agree with victors in war. in his first report, which he also edited and spread.62 The scene has become a sensation as well as a popular iconographic theme for art, as illustrated by several graphics, paintings, and drawings that soon appeared and projected the degraded image of the defeated French Emperor by striking means of then widely spread antiNapoleonic cartoons. The scene was conceived even more dramatically by artists and writers than the rumours of the battlefield or the memories of some witnesses: Napoleon’s coachman pierced by Prussian bayonets and Napoleon fleeing on horseback often without his hat, sword or his honour.63 Another theme was also popular - the immortalization of the field marshal Blücher with the war booty, as it was romanticized in the spirit of period historicism by the Berlin painter Rudolf Eichstaedt (1857-1924), focusing on genre, portrait, and historical painting.64 Napoleon's carriage landau, which was brought to his estate by Marshal Blücher, was destined to become a bearer of the myth, conceived by the field marshal himself in the contours of period romanticism, and then be kept in the family memory of the Blüchers. The first blows to this myth in the world arena were dealt by Napoleon himself, who, in exile on the island of Saint Helena, waged his last battle Marshal Blücher, as well as other actors who had participated in a war campaign culminating successfully on the battlefield at Waterloo in June 1815, were impressed by the idea of building his image on the fragmented image of the defeated French Stawitzky, Geschichte des Königlich Preussischen 25sten Infanterie-Regiments, 124–125. 63 Such an iconographic program is offered on an engraving of English origin from 1816, or by an engraving of German origin, kept at the Fontainebleau Chateau; the reproduction see Tulard (ed.), La Berline de Napoléon, 64–65. 64 A transfer of Eichstaedt's painting under the title 1815 Blücher empfängt bei Genappe die erbeuteten Orden, Hut und Degen Napoleons [translation Blücher takes possession of Napoleon's orders, hat and sword after the Battle of Waterloo, 18 June 1815] was made by J. Arndt. A copy of a painting by Eichstaedt is also kept in Musée de la Légion dʼhonneur in Paris, see Tulard (ed.), La Berline de Napoléon, 77. 65 „La légende voulut aussi que tout le butin fût trouvé dans la voiture de lʼempereur, car celle-ci augmentait la magie des objets et le prestige de leurs nouveaux propriétaires.“ Autengruber and Wodey, Histoire du « butin de Blücher », in Tulard (ed.), La Berline de Napoléon, 79. 62 43 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society Genappe only midnight.66 with a historical memory, culminating in the posthumous publication of his memories in 1823; in 1817 he did not hesitate to designate Blücher as a general without talent when speaking to Edward Barry O’Meara. In 1857, less than 40years after the death of Marshal Blücher, Ernst Heinrich Ludwig Stawitzky, captain of the 25th Prussian Infantry Regiment (Hauptmann im 25sten Infanterie-Regiment), dealt this myth another blow. Based on period reports and reports by major Konstantin von Witzleben (1784-1845) and other direct participants at the Genappe events, he put the records straight. According to him, the fact that the Emperor, who intended to travel from Genappe to Quatre-Bras and Philippeville in his carriage, jumped up near Genappe at the last minute as the Prussian tirailleur approached the carriage, the information was information previously appearing in publications, but which was disproved by the revision of historical facts related to the period reports of the campaign in 1815. For its obvious impossibility, it was subject to critical analysis. Stawitzky proved that the French Emperor had left Genappe on horseback at around ten o'clock in the evening, while the first Prussian soldiers arrived only an hour later; so they could not directly chase the French Emperor, nor surprise him in the chariot. The “Hero of the Day” field marshal Blücher arrived in half 2019 - 2020 an hour before Today we live at a different time, trying to understand the past without prejudice; more important than myths is real knowledge. Therefore we examine the traces of the past so that we can understand the past itself. Napoleon's Waterloo carriage landau appropriated by the field marshal Blücher as his war booty was also freed from the myth attributed to him by historical events and their main actors. More than a well-deserved reputation for being a war trophy acquired under dramatic circumstances, which had accompanied the carriage for decades in the history of mentalities in the Blücher estates, it began to be internationally understood as a museum value bearer in the field of museums and cultural heritage protection due to its extraordinary historical significance. Thus, in 2012, commemorating the 200th anniversary of Napoleon's Russian campaign, it was presented as part of an exhibition project in Paris as the carriage of Emperor Napoleon I, which was used and which successfully returned from this campaign before returning to serve the Emperor in 1815, and as one of a few carriages captured in Genappe survived looting and remained preserved to the present days. As a gift from the Blücher family to the French state, it was in 1975, one hundred and sixty years later, released from its destiny to be a Stawitzky, Geschichte des Königlich Preussischen 25sten Infanterie-Regiments, 98–101 and 124–125. 66 44 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society war trophy and enriched the French national collections as important Napoleonic Memorabilia (napoleonicum, objet napoléonien) and exceptional museum exhibit at Malmaison Chateau. Although it lost its status of rare family memorabilia of a renowned ancestor, attributed to it at the 2019 - 2020 Raduň Chateau, however, it became important memorabilia of common European history, referring to the prominent figures of politics and military that shaped and influenced it during and after the Napoleonic Wars. 45 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society 46 2019 - 2020 Fig. 1 Raduň Chateau located nearby Opava in the historical Czech Silesia, Czech Republic (National Heritage Institute – Raduň Chateau) Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society 2019 - 2020 Fig. 2 Gebhard Leberecht Blücher von Wahlstatt (1742–1819), portrait, oil on canvas, Karl Dudde, 1913 (National Heritage Institute – Raduň Chateau, Inv. No. RD 55) 47 Napoleonic Scholarship: The Journal of the International Napoleonic Society 2019 - 2020 Fig. 3 Historical photograph of Napoleon´s carriage from Waterloo on a cardboard preserved at Raduň Chateau, Florian Gödel, 1901 (National Heritage Institute – Raduň Chateau, Inv. No. RD 2584) Fig. 4 Napoleon´s carriage (berline en landau) from Waterloo at the Malmaison Chateau, Cauyette and Getting, 1812 (photo by Marian Hochel) 48