Maverick Military Leaders Summary

Napoleon Bonaparte will remain in the heart of many French nationals as one of the greatest military leaders that the nation has had when it comes to warfare history. In 1799, Napoleon launched a series of wars, which historian call, “Napoleonic wars” in a bid to extend the territory of France in Europe. Many historians argue that the Napoleonic wars were a continuation of the earlier war under the tag, French revolution in 1789. The French revolution in itself had so many influences in Europe, especially with the armies who felt the greatest impact of the revolution. The revolution brought with it many changes, especially in the production of modern mass weapons with the conscription in place. The new improvements in weaponry made Napoleon seek hegemony in the entire Europe sparking his quest to expand and increase the revolutionary and territorial borders of France. Napoleon, Corsican aristocrat, who was a minor, rose to the position of emperor in France because of the revolution and his idea was to sweep the entire Europe with the reforms brought about by the revolution (Dwyer 32). The idea was to liberate the continent so that all citizens had a chance to take the helm of leadership and do away with the issue of kinship rule. Napoleon was a symbol of change, and although at some point, he comes out as a dictator, he was progressive and created rationalization of governance and all the social

There are a number of qualities that quantify good leaderships and good leaders. According to Kouzes and Posner in their book The Leadership Challenge, all successful leaders have (5) practices in common. They “Model the Way”, “Inspire a shared vision”, “Challenge the process”, “enable others to act” and “encourage the heart”(15). Never is there a more important time to have exemplary leadership, than in a time of war. Both the American Civil War and World War II showed what was possible through good leadership. From abolishing slavery and preserving the Union, to fighting tyranny and oppression abroad, both events in American history had a profound impact on all those involved. The impact would most certainly be different if not for the leadership of Colonel Lawrence Chamberlain of the Union Army during the Civil War and General George S. Patton during World War II. Both leaders possessed the 5 practices essential for god leadership, yet both leaders to different approaches to accomplish their goals.

The relative closeness to the present circumstances that this renders aids him as he constructs his “defense” (606). Early on, he lets on that he was not, and still is not, for war or this misuse of youth. His apparent contempt and disdain colors each passage in his piece. Although this stance may bias his opinions, he takes care to relay his message and provide relative insight into what life as a soldier is like. However, his assumption that “these kids signed up mostly to get some education” (606) is the principal evidence of his use of hasty generalizations by which he uses to reason their decision to enlist, undermining the credibility he draws from.

Mass politics had taken hold in France and was threatening other European monarchies. Author MacGregor Knox summed up the political effect on the military very well in the book, The dynamics of military revolution 1300-2050. He said, “The military revolution that emerged in and from the Revolution's wars was a political-ideological revolution that remade warfare from top to bottom, from strategy, to operations and logistics, to tactics.” Napoleon Bonaparte looked at his armies as a political tool. He believed war to be an extension of foreign policy (politics) which was an idea Carl von Clausewitz wrote about in his book On War. Clausewitz would later reflect on the French Revolutionary Wars saying, “the colossal weight of the whole French people, unhinged by political fanaticism, came crashing down upon us”. Napoleon not only practiced foreign policy through making war, he used his success on the battle field to raise to the rank General and Commander of the French Army by age of 26. Bonaparte returned to Paris and engineered a military coup d'etat and pronounced himself Emperor of France. Napoleon had joined the side of the revolution and fought to rid France of monarchy rule, only bring back dictatorship government to the

Napoleon as an emperor told people that there would be public schools and that there they would teach things such as science, language arts, etc. This benefitted the people of France. Now everyone would receive education. Back then, those in the government did not want anyone uneducated to vote. Now they had a chance to voice their opinion. As stated in Document 8. I think this motivated Napoleon because again he wanted to win their support and love and wanted them to feel empowered as well as others who can vote and feel as they can too do the things they can. In the book, it stated that he won many wars and that also ties into being the son of the revolution because he did not let his country down and kept it strong. It kept the enemies away and kept the people happy. He used propaganda every time he won a war. He usually asked someone to paint a mural of him seeming superior to please the people of France. Napoleon is the son of the revolution to those he pleased. The motivation for this was as well to win over the people's support and love as well as to show them that he can protect them and be a good leader to them and him showing them that he can win many wars would make them feel safe around him, I

During the years 1800 to 1815 Napoleon Bonaparte was preparing a large army. His goal was to spread the idea of the French Revolution and ultimately expanded France's bountiful pride and glory. The way this was going to happen, according to Napoleon, was through expanding French territory. In order to do this he would need a large army, so that involved enlisting men by conscription. The army was filled with French men, as well as men from Germany and other surrounding areas. The Diary of a Napoleonic Foot Soldier looks first hand look at the life of an average soldier at the time, Jakob Walter. He was a nineteen year old german boy enlisted by conscription and assigned to regiment Romig, later known as Franquemont Regiment. In somewhat of

Napoleon Bonaparte, an influential leader of France, was a man of many facets. On one the one hand, Napoleon was a strong leader who created durable institutions and strengthened France, but on the other, there is a more pitiful view of Napoleon. The view of Napoleon was initially very positive: he viewed himself as a protector of the people, and the people saw this too; however, over time, this image was greatly worsened, due to military hardship.

Throughout my life and my military career I have experienced various leadership styles, from civilian employers to military Officers and Non-Commissioned officers alike. Each had their own approach to leadership, some I found to be effective and others I did not. I have attempted to create a leadership philosophy based on a fusion of the leaders I have encountered and my own personal experiences.

Born November 11, 1885 in San Gabriel, California, General George Smith Patton, Jr. was one of the most complicated, yet greatest leaders in military history. On June 11, 1909, he attended the Virginia Military Institute (VMI) for a year and then to the United States Military Academy at West Point where he commissioned as a Second Lieutenant in the 15th cavalry Regiment. Growing up, Patton’s ultimate life goal was to become a hero and a successful leader. In Robert B. Williamson’s book, “General Patton’s Principles for Life & Leadership”, the author takes a personal account of Patton’s principles which he lived and fought for. These main principles consisted of the following: Leadership,

This source is an academic journal article from Past & Present, and the article was found on the database JSTOR. This article describes Napoleon’s officers on the battlefield and in civilian life. My research question applies to Napoleon’s revolutionary ground warfare strategy and therefore the description of Napoleon’s officers’ social lives did not intrigue or concern me. Napoleon was a very large supporter of the delegation of responsibilities on the battlefield. Napoleon strived to have his army run by a small army of competent officers who could make their own decisions in the midst of a battle instead of asking for Napoleon’s strategic expertise. Napoleon, when he seized power, destroyed the aristocratic based government and replaced

In terms of guerilla warfare, there are smaller groups of soldiers who are not part of a traditional army. These combatants use military tactics to fight a larger, more established army. Bonaparte, the main character in Frank O’Connor’s Guest of a Nation, and his comrade, Noble, are Irish rebels who are holding two Englishmen, Belcher and Hawkins captive. One night, Bonaparte receives the truth: that the two Englishmen are hostages and that ultimately he has to kill them. He stills hopes for circumstances to change, so he can abandon his duty and spare their lives because he really has nothing against them. Bonaparte grows to like Belcher and Hawkins despite their being on opposing sides of the war and vice versa.

This document speaks to how in many ways they put Napoleon on a pedestal and how he took this view in order to gain more power. The purpose of this document is to show Napoleon as a more godly figure and to move him into the view of an absolute ruler. This helps to show how Napoleon betrayed the legacy of the French revolution by taking on an absolute

Napoleon Bonaparte is seen by historians in a variety of lights. Some judge him for his lack of mercy for those in his warpath along with his unmatched air of confidence. Others choose to see him for the leadership abilities and keen mind that fueled his remarkable triumphs as a general, commander, First Consul of France, and even emperor. Owen Connelly uses his work, The Epoch of Napoleon, to bridge the gap that other historians and authors have skimmed over, giving the reader an inside look at not only Napoleon’s military life, but also his political and personal life. Furthermore, Connelly achieves this by showing both the ruthless and heroic sides of Napoleon, including non-military details from the life of Napoleon, and lastly, including quotes from Napoleon and those that interacted with him.

In 1796 as a young officer of 27 years old, Napoleon was given command of the French army in Italy. In his proclamation to his troops, Napoleon said, 'The two armies which but recently attacked you with audacity are fleeing before you in terror; the wicked men who laughed at your misery and rejoiced at the thought of the triumphs of your enemies are confounded and trembling.' Acts like this display the strong personality that Napoleon possessed and how his endearing nature captivated his troops. The control and support of the army was effective in enabling Bonaparte to eventually seize power.

There is no question in the fact that Napoleon Bonaparte was a significant character in France. However, there have been debates among historians for years around the central question: “Was Napoleon Bonaparte a hero or a villain?” The answer here relies on how one looks upon the situation. Was Napoleon Bonaparte a savior to the French, or was he a tyrant to the French? Although many historians’ answers do rely deeply onto perspective, their answers also lie within which stage of life Napoleon Bonaparte was in, as well as the shift in opinions that come as time changes. Paul Stock and Phillip Dwyer analyze Napoleon Bonaparte’s influence and through the analysis, debate on whether Napoleon Bonaparte should be considered a hero or a villain,