There is another story that the chart tells which everyone oddly overlooks in favour of the dramatic crossing of the Berezina, and that is the horrendous disease and attrition suffered at the very beginning of the invasion, while crossing the Belorussian provinces. Minard indicates that effectively half of Napoleon's force was lost or tied up elsewhere (detachments were needed to protect supply depots, others were sent north to Riga and Polotsk). Besides desertion and skirmishing with the rearguard of the Russian armies accounting for losses, the big killers in July and August were lice. Modern scholars dispute Minard's numbers, but the take-away is that the Grande Armee lost many more men and horses in Vilna and Minsk, in sweltering heat and drought and ridden with vermin, than freezing or drowning by Borisov.
This was fascinating. I've seen this chart shared and appear so often, so I really enjoyed learning more about its brilliance and its limitations. Thank you!
Great video! Interesting insights into our choice of what data we highlight and what point we are trying to make with our visualizations. Can't wait to see more of your videos, Robert!
When I first saw this chart, it was explained as showing the effects of cold weather and used as commentary on Nepolean. It was an English person who introduced the chart to me. Apart from being false, it also reinforces the point Robert mentions about how people created stories around the frozen river (5:15), and the truism that data does not interpret itself. A great video that I'm glad to have watched. Thanks.
I knew the figure before, but I like the context you provide. And I also like your reasoning about the turned figures. I was not quite aware of that. This is cool stuff, and I am looking forward to seeing your next videos. And I like that you name it that it was not just a French army. A tidbit: A would-be-ancestor of mine got lost as part of that campaign. So his fiancee, an ancestor of mine, had to marry someone else.
Oh wow, that's a fascinating connection! Menno-Jan Kraak wrote a great book about the map (Mapping Time), he also had a distant relative who died in the war.
This is interesting, but I don't see the point. You almost always have to simplify and filter to help your audience clearly and quickly grasp the information. As Minard did. As interesting as your alternative diagram is, it is nowhere near as effective in showing how disastrous this was for the French army, which I'd assume is what Minard intended.
Fair point, and I've written about the need to reduce and simplify to make a point and tell a story (the link is in the video description). My point here though was to provide some context to a chart that is shown in every single data vis course, but without any other context. There's a lot more to the situation than most people realize, and it's especially grating when people start telling stories about it that aren't based in any kind of reality. I'll have to make another video about telling stories and leaving stuff out, I have opinions on that too ;)
There is another story that the chart tells which everyone oddly overlooks in favour of the dramatic crossing of the Berezina, and that is the horrendous disease and attrition suffered at the very beginning of the invasion, while crossing the Belorussian provinces. Minard indicates that effectively half of Napoleon's force was lost or tied up elsewhere (detachments were needed to protect supply depots, others were sent north to Riga and Polotsk). Besides desertion and skirmishing with the rearguard of the Russian armies accounting for losses, the big killers in July and August were lice. Modern scholars dispute Minard's numbers, but the take-away is that the Grande Armee lost many more men and horses in Vilna and Minsk, in sweltering heat and drought and ridden with vermin, than freezing or drowning by Borisov.
This was fascinating. I've seen this chart shared and appear so often, so I really enjoyed learning more about its brilliance and its limitations. Thank you!
Thanks, glad you enjoyed it!
Great video! Interesting insights into our choice of what data we highlight and what point we are trying to make with our visualizations. Can't wait to see more of your videos, Robert!
Thanks, Josh!
When I first saw this chart, it was explained as showing the effects of cold weather and used as commentary on Nepolean. It was an English person who introduced the chart to me. Apart from being false, it also reinforces the point Robert mentions about how people created stories around the frozen river (5:15), and the truism that data does not interpret itself. A great video that I'm glad to have watched. Thanks.
Thanks for the kind words, much appreciated!
Great work, Robert!
Thanks, Ann!
I knew the figure before, but I like the context you provide. And I also like your reasoning about the turned figures. I was not quite aware of that. This is cool stuff, and I am looking forward to seeing your next videos. And I like that you name it that it was not just a French army. A tidbit: A would-be-ancestor of mine got lost as part of that campaign. So his fiancee, an ancestor of mine, had to marry someone else.
I realize that nothing here tells you I am German. My would-be-ancestor was (forcefully?) recruited from the street, family history sais.
Oh wow, that's a fascinating connection! Menno-Jan Kraak wrote a great book about the map (Mapping Time), he also had a distant relative who died in the war.
I'm interested in learning how to use this map as a learns to demonstrate my conflict case. Any help? 🙏
This is interesting, but I don't see the point. You almost always have to simplify and filter to help your audience clearly and quickly grasp the information. As Minard did. As interesting as your alternative diagram is, it is nowhere near as effective in showing how disastrous this was for the French army, which I'd assume is what Minard intended.
Fair point, and I've written about the need to reduce and simplify to make a point and tell a story (the link is in the video description). My point here though was to provide some context to a chart that is shown in every single data vis course, but without any other context. There's a lot more to the situation than most people realize, and it's especially grating when people start telling stories about it that aren't based in any kind of reality. I'll have to make another video about telling stories and leaving stuff out, I have opinions on that too ;)