War and Peace · Chapter
Aftermath of Borodino explained
The chapter describes the horrific aftermath of the Battle of Borodino, with tens of thousands of dead and wounded littering the fields.
What happens
The chapter describes the horrific aftermath of the Battle of Borodino, with tens of thousands of dead and wounded littering the fields. A universal hesitation and existential question—'For what, for whom, must I kill and be killed?'—spreads among the exhausted soldiers of both armies. Despite this horror, the battle grinds on by an 'incomprehensible, mysterious power.' The narrative analyzes the strategic and moral stalemate: neither side can muster the final, decisive effort. The Russians, having lost half their army, hold their ground but cannot attack; the French, with their Guards intact, find their 'moral force' exhausted and cannot press their advantage. The chapter concludes that Borodino was a decisive moral victory for Russia, a 'mortal wound' to Napoleon's army that doomed its invasion.
Themes in this chapter
War and History
The chapter is a raw, unflinching depiction of the physical and psychological aftermath of battle. It moves from graphic descriptions of the carnage to a philosophical analysis of historical causation, arguing against the 'Great Man' theory by asserting that Napoleon's failure to commit the Guard was not a choice but an inevitability born of the army's exhausted 'moral force.'
Search for Meaning
A profound existential question arises spontaneously in every soldier's soul: 'For what, for whom, must I kill and be killed?' This moment of universal hesitation highlights the absurdity and horror of war, stripping away the abstract causes to reveal the individual human cost and moral confusion.
Key passages
“For what, for whom, must I kill and be killed?… You may go and kill whom you please, but I don’t want to do so any more!”
A moment of universal clarity and horror strikes the exhausted soldiers, making them question the very purpose of the slaughter.
Highlights the existential crisis and rejection of violence that emerges from direct experience of battle's horror.
“To speak of what would have happened had Napoleon sent his Guards is like talking of what would happen if autumn became spring. It could not be.”
Historians who claim Napoleon could have won by using his reserves are fundamentally mistaken; the psychological and moral conditions made such an action impossible.
Encapsulates Tolstoy's deterministic view of history, arguing that events are shaped by vast, impersonal forces, not individual decisions.
“a moral victory that convinces the enemy of the moral superiority of his opponent and of his own impotence was gained by the Russians at Borodinó.”
The true, decisive outcome of Borodino was not territorial but psychological: it broke the invading army's spirit and sense of invincibility.
Defines the core of Tolstoy's argument about the battle's historical significance.