Napoleon Bonaparte was possibly the greatest battle strategist and commander in history. He graduated from his first military school at the age of 9, and was promptly accepted into the Ércole Royale Militaire in Paris, where he completed the standard 2-year course in a single year. He accepted a post as a second lieutenant at age 16, serving through the revolution in 1789. During the siege of Toulon, which had been taken by the English, Napoleon was appointed artillery commander of the French forces. He coolly aimed the guns at the British ships, forcing them to retreat. During the skirmish that followed, the French successfully retook Toulon and Napoleon was promoted to brigadier-general.
A few years after this event, Napoleon became romantically involved with Joséphine de Beauharnais, the former mistress of the leader of the executive power in France. They married on March 9, 1796. Just days after they married, Napoleon took command of the French ‘Army of Italy’ and led it in a successful invasion into its namesake. Shortly after this success, Napoleon showed his independence by ignoring a direct order to march into Rome and dethrone Pope Pius VI. Instead, he stayed at home, not making another move until early 1797, when he marched into Austria and forced it to sue for peace. The Treaty of Campo Formino gave France a good portion of Northern Italy, as well as the Low Countries and Rhineland. However, Austria included a secret clause which promised Venice to them. Napoleon consequently marched on Venice and ended over 1,000 years of independence.
All of these military victories were a result of Napoleon’s encyclopedic knowledge of modern war tactics. As he so eloquently put it, “I have fought 60 battles and I have learned nothing that I did not know in the beginning.” One of his more simple strategies was to focus all his forces onto an unsuspecting foe, obliterate their army, take control of their land, and be back in position before anyone else had a chance to react. Though he was gaining more and more land for the French, they newly elected royalists in the government accused Napoleon of overstepping his bounds and looting Italy. Napoleon, in turn, sent one of his generals to Paris on a coup d’etat to ‘purge the royalists.’ Having put the Republican Directors firmly back in control, Napoleon quickly became more popular than any government figure, which gave him unbelievable power in matters of state.
In March of 1798, Napoleon proposed an expedition to seize Egypt, protecting his country’s trade routes and jeopardizing Britain’s access to India. The Director’s, thinking to rid themselves of the most popular man in their midst, agreed readily, though thinking regretfully of the cost and scope. After landing in Egypt, Napoleon attacked Mamelukes, one of the oldest powers. He was greatly outnumbered, but again his strategy prevailed. Only 300 French were killed, as opposed to 6,000 on the Egyptian side. Though the land battle was won by the French, the British began to compensate by sea. Spotting the French ships anchored near the land, Horatio Nelson ordered his ships to slip into the small gap between the French and the land. Attacked from both sides, all but one of the French ships were captured or sunk. Confined to the land, Napoleon could only watch as his Egyptian campaign began to crumble. It is debated why, but it was at this point he turned control of the army over to General Kleber and returned to France.
Being Napoleon, he was always looking for opportunities. One arrived in the form of a man named Sieyés, who wanted to overthrow the French Constitution. After securing Napoleon’s help, he thought that he would become the dominant force, but Napoleon quietly undermined his plans. When he drafted the new Constitution, he carefully secured his own election to the post of First Consul. When the constitution was rewritten 3 years later, he was given the position for life.
After deciding that the territory we know as the Louisiana Purchase was simply a nuisance, he sold it to America for around 3 cents to the acre. 10 years later, he divorced and remarried in order to produce an heir, shortly after being crowned the king of Italy. To give a crash course of what happened next would make it much easier to deal with, so here we go.
Napoleon campaigned extensively in Russia, despite many people’s advice against it. Though all seemed well, the French could only elude defeat for so long. Eventually, the much reduced French forces were surrounded, and Napoleon was forced to abdicate in favor of his son. He was promptly exiled to a small Mediterranean island called Elba. A year later, Napoleon managed to escape and returned to the mainland. He returned to his soldiers, marched on Paris, and ruled for a hundred days, a which point he was defeated in the battle of Waterloo. He fled to a nearby port, where he began to sail desperately for the United States. He was quickly accosted, forced to surrender, and exiled to Saint Helena, where he died several years later.
Though the cause of Napoleon’s death remains disputed, it is thought that he died from the high levels of arsenic he absorbed throughout his lifetime. This is supported by how well preserved his body was, because arsenic is a strong preservative. Also, after examining portions of Napoleon’s hair, it was discovered that the arsenic levels there were seven to thirty-eight times higher than normal. However, during that period arsenic was used in hair tonic and also as a cure for syphilis. Modern day scientists performed an autopsy on the body, and discovered that the most likely cause of death was, in fact, stomach cancer, not arsenic.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

5 comments:
hey,
My topic is soo realted to yours because your guy, Napolean, ended everything the people of France fought for my declaring himself Emporer of France!
Reading your blog, I was struck by the way that more advanced techniques of weaponry aided Napoleon in his battles. For the past two weeks I have been looking at the advancements in weapons during the Early Modern Period.
Without guns, I wonder if Napoleon would have been able to have the same level of complexity in his battle strategies. Guns were the first powerful weapon that needed only one person to operate. If Napoleon had had to use cannons, he would not have had the same mobility that his army used to its advantage.
You talked about how Napoleon gained the status of a politician because of his battle success. In my research, war in the Early Modern Period had huge political impacts. Those who waged war caused many smaller cities and towns to be absorbed into larger domains. This caused political systems to be condensed. With all the territory that Napoleon acquired, it is no surprise that he gained such a powerful role. War’s role in politics is still present in today’s government. Many people in the United States feel that a qualified president needs to have a strong military background.
From what I understand, Napoleon was primarily fighting battles in Europe, where the use of gunpowder had advanced rapidly. This allowed Europe to have the capacity to build more formidable weapons. This made European countries immediate rivals, and much of the fighting in the Early Modern Period took place in this area of the world. At one point, Europe’s weapons became so advanced and powerful that some European government feared what would happen if the public gained access to them. To prevent hazard, the governments made using a privately owned firearm illegal.
Without advanced weaponry, Napoleon would have had to have drastically different battle strategies, many of which today’s military could barely imagine in today’s world of tanks, planes, and machine guns. Without firearms, he would have been forced to train knights and wield no more than sharp pieces of metal. Would he still be considered the military success he is today? Who knows…
Like Napoleon, Catherine The Great was very strongly involved in the military. She used her cunning to snag the greatest military strategists and generals in Russia. She overthrew her own husband to become empress of Russia. Some of her faults were that she favored a mediocre general over a highly capable one because she was in a relationship with him. Her takeover reminds me a lot af Napoleon. She also was part of major Russian expansion. Claiming land around what was then Russia, much like Napoleon taking over other countries
Hi Natalie,
My topic is the Haitian Revolution, which has to do with Napoleon, because Haiti was a French colony and the revolution was 1791-1804, around the same time Napoleon first started his military career (you said he served through the French revolution). Toussaint L'Ouverture (the leader of the HR) and the Haitian slaves were not as cunning as Napoleon, but they did have strong will and a good reason to fight: they were taken away from their home in Africa to become slaves under one of the most brutal slave systems in the new world. I think the Haitian revolution is an excellent example of a lot of angry oppressed people over-throwing their oppressor. It doesn't matter if Napoleon was the best military strategist, the slaves had passion for the war they were fighting.
Something I wonder about is why the French fought with Haiti for so long (13 years). I mean Haiti is a small island (in fact it's not even the whole island, just a part of it) in the middle of the Caribbean Sea, why bother? At first, I thought that maybe they did not want to admit defeat to a bunch of slaves, but that isn't a very good reason to send hundreds of soldiers of to be killed. Maybe Napoleon realized how important it was to have some claim to land in the new world, no matter how small. But if that is the case then why did he sell the Louisiana Purchase? I think it would be very interesting to get inside the mind of Napoleon and see what he was thinking. Bye now! -
Emma S. (my URL is: http://thehaitianrevolution.blogspot.com/2007/01/introduction-to-haitian-revolution.html)
Could you tell me where you found the information about the autopsy? I believe he was buried in an unmarked grave, may have been switched w/ another body, and the French authorities wouldn't let anyone exhume his corpse. (P.S. the hair samples were those taken by his admirers after his death, and it is likely they were dusted with arsenic to keeep the bugses out) ^-^ But if there was an autopsy done, I'd like to read about it. Could you post your source?
Butting out now.
Napoleon and Social Darwinism are related because the French revolution was aimed at destroying the rigid social structure and providing equality. It worked...comparitively...Until Napoleon came along. The rest, as they say, is history. (bwa ha ha)
~Leblueberet
www.socidar.blogspot.com
Peoples, visit my blog! Educate yourselves! (Plus, I'm lonely)
Post a Comment