How can Napoleon's military successes be explained?

Methods

Conditions

Historiography

Inability of other armies

Personality

Weapons

Tactics

Dichotomy (man of peace/starting wars)

Key events

Russian Campaign 1812

Italian Campaign 1796

Hundred Days 1815

Battle of Marengo 1800

Battle of Austerlitz 1805

Peace treaties

Treaty of Amiens 1802

Summary points

Napoleon was a highly successful military general up to 1808

Failures after 1808 partly due to his own mistakes

"Napoleon walked too far"

Main failure

Size and quality of his military

Propaganda: immortalised victories

Living off land

Franklin Ford - "his debt to the revolution" Pursuing retreating armies

Often alongside troops "one of them"

Often reliant on mercinaries

Not unified

Not largely superior

Although artillery was lighter

War of the Coalitions

Arrogance & Power Hungry

Similar to his style of rule

Not entirely dependent on his own skill

Combination of weakness of enemies and the dynamic tactics he employed

Unified: fighting for common cause

Highly trained

65,000 at Austerlitz

Varied tactics: kept enemies guessing

190,000 at Leipzig

A. Meynier (military historian) - 1800-15 2 million frenchmen enrolled; yet his enemies could match his numbers

Spoke different languages

Differences between countries (reasons for fighting GB vs Austria)

Soldiers

Often unable to deal with unpredictable strategies of warfare

Lack of enthusiasm of enemies to raise raw recruits until 1813-5 - fear of ill discipline, lack of cooperation from allies (Napoleon exploits)

Lacked enthusiasm

Other generals were effective

Battle of Austerlitz saved by successful generals

Not reliant on supplies which increased mobility and limited the weakness of armies

Organisation

Huge French levees

Ordre mixte

Combined ordre mince (thin line) and ordre profond (thick line)

Some of his tactics were taken from the best of the ancien regime

Ford (on tactics)

"His debt to the revolution" was his relentless pursuit of the retreating enemy, resulting in carnage

Could be argued he was only really legendary when on the defensive

Inherited an army that was superior to other European nations

Ancien Regime effectiveness

Conscription from the Terror

"Magnetic Personality" - a way with his troops that ensured they didn't want to fail him

Living off the Land was adopted from army drill book 1791

Military engineers also inherited (which were in short supply among enemies)

Detailed planning and quick speed to ensure best positions in battles

Government

Superior Tactics until 1813-5

First Consul also Commander in Chief

Manoeuvred the enemy into a weak position --> outnumbered charges with troops --> wore it down with mass artillery, bayonets, and cavalry --> pursued it relentlessly

Maximised involvement in army affairs

Maximised power potential

This only came into question in the War of the 6th Coalition: government considered accepting Austria's proposal of returning to 1792 borders

No conflict of civil or military interests

Centralised control

Ministry of War

Expanded and divided into two sections for army and administration

Travelled with troops and appeared to share their sugaring

Increased effectiveness

Organisation partly based on 1770's formations

Visited men before battles, delivered daily bulletin

Generals gained promotions off their own merit and were loyal

Awarded many medals - created Legion of Honour (encourages acts of valour)

Battle of Austerlitz: Russian and Austrian troops failed to cooperate (Napoleon then exploited their divisions)

Well paid and fed

Compared to allied generals: young, willing, approachable vs. old, cautious, and aloof

Able to utilise their enemies to his advantage

Slow to adapt tactics (more traditional)

Refused technological innovation (semaphore telegraph, underwater warships, explosive rockets, ground balloon, sharp knife on musket, new training methods)

High morale

Amalgame: mixed veterans with new soldiers to teach recruits

Often a result of successes and victories

O. Connelly

Promises of "la Gloire" (victory)

Criticised Napoleon's reputation as a general, many victories close, says he was often lucky

Murat, Ney, and Davout

Despite lacking numbers initially, was able to gather support due to the remaining loyalty of former soldiers

Failures

Methods

Conditions

Conclusion(s)

Napoleon's generalship WAS important - but not the be all end all

Also resulted in his downfall

Battle of Leipzig (1813): Russians adopted similar tactics and Napoleon was unable to respond effectively

Although this was also based on the terrain

Quality of troops and tactics of enemies gradually improved

Ignorance of weather and Climate (Egypt mud 1806), Russia (1812)

Although use of foreign armies in the Russian Campaign limited this unity and loyalty: almost reverted to the weaknesses of his enemies

Despite his lack of innovation with technology, his strategies mostly made up for it (until enemies began taking his ideas)

Napoleon had "walked too far"

Hesitated uncharacteristically in the Battle of Sorondino: it was his birthday (but resulted in battle)

Losses due to failure to stop pursuing and consolidate gains while enemies strength grew

Risks that previously had paid off (Marengo, Austerlitz) not always successful

Did not embrace technological advancement

Never prepared to negotiate or compromise - the confidence and arrogance that helped with military successes proved to be his downfall

Rejected submarines and explosive rockets

Losing support within France

Malet Affair: employing his son was not discussed (limits to his empire)

Decline in quality and size of French army: forced Napoleon to recruit from satellite states

Only half of 650,000 troops were French

Economic conditions: Continental System hurt France's economy and reduced industrial base