Napoleon Bonaparte once stated that “History is written by the winners”. History now remembers Napoleon as one of the greatest war generals of all time. From his early life, until his death, Napoleon displayed commendable military might on the battlefield. Having ever only lost two battles, Napoleon managed to bring Europe to its knees through his innovative military tactics and talent on the battlefield. Although Napoleon had many great victories, some historians argue that Napoleon was not a military genius, but rather he won his battles by luck. This viewpoint is invalid because Napoleon won over 50 battles in his lifetime, and most of his battles were against armies with superior numbers armies. Even Napoleon’s greatest rival, The Duke of Wellington, considered “Napoleon's presence in the field equal to forty thousand men”. Therefore, luck is a superficial factor, and we should accept that Napoleon was a military genius. The battles of Austerlitz, Marengo, and Pyramids were among the greatest displays of Napoleon’s military prowess. To fully understand the extent of Napoleon’s genius, analysis of the battles is required.
Firstly, the battle of Austerlitz is considered Napoleon’s masterpiece by many people, including him. This battle is significant because it was a great demonstration of Napoleon’s intelligence. Napoleon’s incredibly risky tactics and excessive cruelty during the battle, show just how far Napoleon was willing to go in order to achieve victory. Napoleon’s main tactic was extremely risky; it involved weakening his right flank and thus causing the enemy to concentrate their troops on the newly weakened side. Since the enemy moved their forces to the right, their center was exposed. Napoleon took full advantage o...
... middle of paper ...
...king a daring journey to Marengo that involved crossing the Swiss Alps, and ended with him gaining control of Italy.
Works Cited
1)http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/34092-history-is-written-by-the-winners
2)http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/19thcentury/articles/austerlitz.aspx
3)http://www.diomedia.com/public/;jsessionid=08068C8490570E2B5BEA11992F3992C9.worker1en/3695575/imageDetails.html
4)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Austerlitz#Aftermath
5)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Austerlitz#Military_and_political_results
6)http://www.virtualtourist.com/travel/Europe/Switzerland/Alps-692776/Warnings_or_Dangers-Alps-TG-C-1.html
7)http://www.mainlesson.com/display.php?author=baldwin&book=fifty&story=napoleon
8)http://www.napoleon-series.org/research/napoleon/speeches/c_speeches1.html
9)http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/campaign_napoleon_italy_1796.html
Napoleon Bonaparte, an unparalleled military commander who conquered most of Europe around the early 1800’s, invaded Russia in 1812, who was under the rule of Tsar Alexander at the time, lost three quarters of his Grande Armee which was composed of soldiers from all over Europe totaling 600,000 soldiers. This part of history is the most talked about and studied military campaign even today by scholars and military school alike. Napoleon’s invasion of Russia in 1812 was a extraordinary expedition that shocked the French Empire to its foundation and led to its eventual collapse just a year later. This Historiographic comparative
It came about, partially due to Napoleon’s strained relationship with Alexander I. The conflict which had arisen can be considered akin to the “Spain’s war of liberation”, as it was also a demonstration of nationalism. However, the implications of this battle were quite different. As France’s uncharacteristic loss had, consequently, yielded to Napoleon losing both a huge sum of his soldiers and his reputation as the invincible ruler. In addition, the loss they suffered had drastically weakened France’s military. Unfortunately for Napoleon, his enemies had immediately seized upon the opportunity to retaliate against the defeated Napoleonic Empire. France’s exposed vulnerability had resulted in the influx of the patriotic sentiments that had been previously
The Art of War is a treatise written in Ancient China that discusses the most and least effective military strategies for successful warfare according to Sun Tzu, a military general whose existence is still debated to this day. While not every military commander in the history of warfare has read it, the strategies provided can be used as a way to assess said commanders and the effectiveness of their campaigns. In Sun Tzu 's own words, “The general that hearkens to my counsel and acts upon it, will conquer: let such a one be retained in command! The general that hearkens not to my counsel nor acts upon it, will suffer defeat:--let such a one be dismissed!”1 This paper will discuss various iconic battles throughout history and how closely the leading commanders of each army followed the advice of Sun Tzu. Despite the fact that Sun Tzu lived hundreds of years before many of these battles took place, the
Napoleon and the Enlightenment The enlightenment was a time of great learning throughout Europe during the eighteenth century. Although the period is significant for scientific and other scholastic advancements, it is most important because it allowed for the opening of great minds—such as that of Napoleon Bonaparte. Shortly after this enlightenment made its way through Europe, revolution and civil war ripped through France between 1879 and 1899. The unrest of the time called for a strong ruler.
Napoleon was not only a great leader, he was also a military genius. As a military genius, Napoleon won many battles to expand France and was always welcomed back to France as a hero. His use of strategic warfare throughout many battles allowed him to be seen as a hero not only in France but all of Europe. Although his army was outnumbered by the Russians and Austrians on December 2, 1805, Napoleon's brilliant strategies resulted in a defeat of the opposing armies in the Battle of Austerlitz.
Napoleon was an outstanding military commander and enjoyed many successful campaigns. Napoleon maintained the Revolutionary syst...
Napoleon was a tyrant because he betrayed the French Revolution ideals of freedom, equality, and poverty. He was the closest person ever to uniting Europe, but did not get that done. He had so much power and used it to become a tyrant. Everyone hated him and would make fun of him .Cartoonists mocked him with cartoons, and people would laugh about how he was so short, but with a big hat, and belly. Napoleon made 3 main and big mistakes; the continental system, peninsular war, and invasion of Russia. Napoleon failed almost everything he did, very few were accomplished.
In the early 19th century a man by the name of Napoleon Bonaparte led a Coup D’etat that created a new government in France. This new government started out with a tribunal leadership, which Napoleon was first consul, and later changed to an empire with Napoleon as emperor. Some people believe that he made the revolution better and expanded the revolution but this is not true. The facts, when closely looked at, prove that Napoleon effectively destroyed the revolution by telling the people of his country one thing while he was actually planning on doing something totally different. He deceived people so well that he is still convincing people today that he was a defender of the revolution.
His campaigns are studied at military academies all over the world. One of Napoleon’s quotes states, "A leader is a dealer in hope." He also stated, "He who fears being conquered is sure of defeat." Although he was considered a tyrant by his opponents, he is also remembered for the establishment of the Napoleonic Code, which helped lay judicial foundations for Western Europe.
French Revolution brought a great number of great ideas, but ideas are not beneficial unless they are realized and stabilized. The man to stabilize the concepts of French Revolution was Napoleon Bonaparte. He started out as an Italian general and ended up being one of the greatest historical figures. First, Directors requested Napoleon's support while organizing a coup d'etat. Then, Bonaparte fought Britain in order to benefit France. Lastly, he was called to help creating a new constitution and ended up as the First Consul of France. At home, he ruled using flattery, but also he strongly resisted the opposition. Napoleon is a pro-revolutionist because he denied all the privileges of the aristocracy, created a new constitution, and also established the Napoleonic Code.
Kreis, Steven. “Europe and the Superior Being: Napoleon.” The History Guide: Lectures on Modern European Intellectual History. 13 May. 2004. 6 Dec. 2004.
Misused intelligence and underestimated opponents were at the heart of Napoleon?s downfall. This was clearly shown at Moscow when the Russians outwitted him by using their scorched earth policy and not meeting him in battle as they agreed. With careful planning, the Russian invasion could have gone a lot better and maybe not have led to Napoleon?s downfall.
With all the glory and the splendour that some countries may have experienced, never has history seen how only only one man, Napoleon, brought up his country, France, from its most tormented status, to the very pinnacle of its height in just a few years time. He was a military hero who won splendid land-based battles, which allowed him to dominate most of the European continent. He was a man with ambition, great self-control and calculation, a great strategist, a genius; whatever it was, he was simply the best. But, even though how great this person was, something about how he governed France still floats among people's minds. Did he abuse his power? Did Napoleon defeat the purpose of the ideals of the French Revolution? After all of his success in his military campaigns, did he gratify the people's needs regarding their ideals on the French Revolution? This is one of the many controversies that we have to deal with when studying Napoleon and the French Revolution. In this essay, I will discuss my opinion on whether or not was he a destroyer of the ideals of the French Revolution.
· One Admiral at that time exclaimed, "If he had an obtained an interview with His Royal Highness the Prince Regent, in half an hour they would have been the best friends in England! " · His contemporaries had no doubt about the charismatic quality of leadership. His great adversary Wellington said to him that the moral effect of his presence in the field and worth an additional force of 40,000 men to the French army. This he ascribed to Napoleon's dual position as both head of state and commander-in-chief, which gave him unparalleled control over events, but also to his great personal popularity with the army. · One of Napoleon's own generals explained this popularity by saying that it "was by familiarities that the Emperor made his soldiers adore him, but it was a means available to only to a commander whom frequent victories had made illustrious; any other general would have injured his reputation by it".
The Campaign of 1812 should have been a another crusade for Napoleon, but he now faced 2 new policies that he had never faced before, the severe Russian winter and the notorious scorched-earth policy. On June 23, 1812 Napoleon's Grande Armee, over 500,000 men strong, poured over the Russian border. An equal amount of Russian forces awaited them. The result of the campaign was a surprise. Two authors, General carl von Clausewitz and Brett James, show similarities in reasons why Napoleon had lost this campaign to Russia.