Compare now the prediction of Bonaparte with what happened. Melas had one hundred and twenty thousand men. He advanced against Masséna in two columns: one, numbering twenty-five thousand men, divided into two parts, advanced on Genoa; the other, forty thousand strong, advanced on Savona. The movements of Melas were carried out exactly as Bonaparte had predicted. In the letter to Masséna, the Austrian plan, as well as the numbers with which Melas was about to attack the Army of Italy, were set forth with wonderful accuracy. When it is remembered that at this time Bonaparte was at Paris, and that the great chain of the Alps intervened between him and the Austrians in Italy, no one can fail to be impressed by the foresight of Bonaparte and the accuracy of this prediction made before the event. Wellington once said that he had been trying all his life to find out what the other fellow was doing over the hill. Bonaparte, at Paris, knew what Melas was doing over the hill.
In the campaign of 1796-97 in Italy, Bonaparte had shown himself a consummate master of tactics and of strategy. In the campaign of Marengo he exhibited, in addition to these qualities, great organizing power. When he returned from Egypt, civil war existed in certain parts of France, the finances were in a deplorable state, and the French armies had been everywhere defeated. In a few months, under his leadership, all was changed. He crushed out the civil war, placed the finances on a firm basis, sent re-enforcements to the Army of the Rhine, and organized the Army of Reserve. Referring to this period, Alison says:—
"The sudden resurrection of France, when Napoleon assumed the helm, is one of the most extraordinary passages of European history.... After the fall of the Committee of Public Safety, the triumph of France centered in Napoleon alone; wherever he did not command in person, the greatest reverses were experienced. In 1795 the Republicans were defeated by Clairfait on the Rhine; in 1796 by the Archduke Charles in Germany. In 1799 their reverses were unexampled both in Italy and Germany; from the 9th Thermidor to the 18th Brumaire, a period of about five years, the fortunes of the Republic were singly sustained by the sword of Napoleon and the lustre of his Italian campaigns. When he seized the helm in November, 1799, he found the armies defeated and ruined; the frontier invaded both on the sides of Italy and Germany; the arsenals empty; the soldiers in despair, deserting their colours; the Royalists revolting against their government; general anarchy in the interior; the treasury empty; the energies of the Republic apparently exhausted. Instantly, as if by enchantment, everything was changed; order reappeared out of chaos, talent emerged from obscurity, vigour arose out of the elements of weakness. The arsenals were filled, the veterans crowded to their eagles, the conscripts joyfully repaired to the frontier, La Vendée was pacified, the exchequer began to overflow. In little more than six months after Napoleon's accession, the Austrians were forced to seek refuge under the cannon of Ulm, Italy was regained, unanimity and enthusiasm prevailed among the people, and the revived energy of the nation was finally launched into a career of conquest."
At the beginning of the campaign of Marengo, Kray's army, numbering one hundred and twenty thousand men, occupied western Germany. The army of Melas, one hundred and twenty thousand strong, occupied northwestern Italy; a British corps of twelve thousand was in Minorca, and a British fleet in the Gulf of Genoa.
To oppose the forces of the allies, Bonaparte had three armies: the Army of the Rhine, numbering one hundred and thirty thousand men, was facing the Austrians in Germany; the Army of Italy, forty thousand strong, was along the Apennines and Maritime Alps; and the Army of Reserve, numbering forty thousand, was assembling near Lake Geneva. It will thus be seen that the allies had two hundred and fifty-two thousand men to oppose the two hundred and ten thousand under the First Consul; and that they possessed the additional advantage of being supreme on the sea.
Such was the situation in the spring of 1800. On the 5th of April Melas began active operations along the Apennines. On the 14th of June the campaign ended at Marengo. In two months and ten days the French, guided by the genius of Bonaparte, had compelled Kray to seek safety in the fortified camp of Ulm, and had defeated Melas and gained possession of northern Italy. These great results were due to Bonaparte. It was he that crossed the Alps. In his brain was born the strategy that led to victory.
In this campaign Bonaparte calculated carefully every movement; he left nothing to chance. Though fortune favored him in many ways, nevertheless his success was due to his genius and to his mastery of his profession. Strategically these operations were almost perfect, yet they were faulty in execution. "The campaign of Marengo," says William O'Connor Morris, "at least in design, was one of the most dazzling of Napoleon's exploits in war. The plan of issuing from Switzerland by a double movement in the rear of the enemy in Swabia and Italy was perhaps equal to any formed by Hannibal; but the execution of it was far from perfect. Moreau completely failed to cut off Kray. Napoleon made a distinct mistake in marching into the plain of Marengo, and he exhibited in this instance a fierce resolve to encounter his adversary at any risk, which cost him dear on more than one occasion. The most striking feature of this part of his career is the restoration of order in France, her sudden and rapid rise out of misfortune, and the revival of her military power; and though this was largely due to the energy and resource of a great nation not often quelled by disaster, it should perhaps be mainly ascribed to Napoleon's genius." At this time Bonaparte was thirty years of age; he was vigorous in mind and body. He was ambitious, and had a massive determination to succeed. He had a will which no obstacle could daunt, a mind original, bold, profound, quick, and penetrating. His eye pierced the depths and reached the heights of things. With a marvellous intuition he was able at times to foresee just what course his adversaries would take. So accurate was his information, so profound his knowledge of military matters, that he was often able to predict what, under certain conditions, would happen. "He had," says Morris, "a faculty of organisation perhaps never equalled, and a power of calculation, a force of insight and industry, and a capacity of mastering details, which Nature has seldom bestowed on man." Moreover, he had made a profound study of the campaigns of the great commanders, and had read many books of history, the perusal of which, says Lamartine, "changes theories into actions, and ideas into men." In short, he was a consummate master of war. The fact that he was a great organizer, a great tactician, and a great strategist, is the real reason why he was so successful in war. Among all other great soldiers of the world, it would be difficult to select a single one who possessed in so marked a degree all these qualities. As an organizer, he was not excelled by either Cæsar or Alexander; as a tactician he was equal to Marlborough or Frederick; as a strategist, he surpassed every soldier of ancient or of modern times. Take him all in all he was, perhaps, the foremost soldier of the world.
Twenty-one years after this campaign, the Emperor Napoleon lay dying at St. Helena. His thoughts were with his army. During a long delirium, while a fierce storm was raging on the island, he was heard to say: "mon fils ... l'armée ... Desaix." These were his last words. Perhaps, amidst the shock of the billows and the battle-like roar of the storm, the great captain believed himself once more with Desaix on the tumultuous field of Marengo.