Napoleon's Influence On Russia

Although his armies enjoyed unprecedented successes and expanded the French Empire from Spain to the steppes of Russia, the Napoleonic way of war was fraught with deficiencies. Due to the Napoleon's genius and mastery of this period of military manoeuvres, he was able to forestall the affects of the inherent limitations of his system until the war of the Sixth Coalition (1813) and eventually the fateful battle of Waterloo (1815). One the most significant, intrinsic flaws in Napoleon's system was related to issues of command. During the beginnings of Napoleon's career, he commanded armies of sizes up to 60 000 troops. In Italy in 1796, he commanded a force of just 38 000. With the increasing sizes of forces in the later empire, due to concepts such as levee en masse and recruitment legislation of 1792, the inability of a single commander to control such vast forces was becoming apparent. The sheer immensity of the forces now mustered was unprecedented. In 1812 the Grande Armee, consisted of a staggering 611 000 soldiers. Much to the hindrance of the later empire, few, if any officers in the Grande Armee, besides Napoleon himself, could command forces

Although Napoleon was able to formulate an army large enough to force the Russians to retreat, he did not prepare enough supplies to support all of his soldiers. Lack of food and clothing weaken his army, especially after the scorched earth policy, which was Alexander I’s intent that Napoleon underestimated. During the Battle of Borodino, Alexander I was not able to secure Moscow, the holy city, as he was forced to retreat, which enabled Napoleon to move forward into the city. By the time Napoleon reached the Moscow, the city had been destroyed and burned, having nothing to motivate him in Moscow, he was forced to retreat. Although Napoleon may have won the battle at Borodino, he did not gain anything from it as Czar Alexander I always seemed to always be one step in front of him, Napoleon was unable to outwit Alexander I and his military tactics. His soldiers were not equipped with the necessary items to survive the scorched earth and the harsh Russian winter, thus, the majority of Napoleon's soldiers perished, reducing his army of 420,000 soldiers to 10,000 soldiers when he left Moscow. The dramatic reduction of soldiers made his army vulnerable to later attacks from the Russians, who understood the terrain and was well fed and fully clothed. Due to the Russian tactics that Napoleon overlooked, he

Few humans have ever come as close to ruling over the entirety of Europe as Napoleon Bonaparte did. As the end of the French Revolution drew near, Napoleon Bonaparte did not hesitate long to create policies that kept him in power. With such power, it was certain that Napoleon would use it to influence to people all over Europe. Napoleon’s impact on the people of France and Europe, who he affected through propaganda, his ideas of nationalism and patriotism, and a codification of laws, was a very long-standing and resilient ideology that was mostly prevalent during the French Revolution.

     After battling with Britain, Spain, and Germany, Napoleon invaded Russia. The purpose of this invasion was to enforce the Continental System. In 1812, a Russian winter and the Russian strategy of Scorched Earth defeated Napoleon and his army of 500,000 men. This was Napoleon’s worst defeat. It

Napoleon 's foreign policy would turn out to be his ultimate downfall and the biggest red mark next to his name. His foreign policy was designed to subdue Europe by military conquest, rather than diplomacy. In short, he wanted to rule the world or as much of it as possible. They fought with Napoleon in what would be known as the Napoleonic wars, but Napoleon won several battles, such as the

The origins of the War of 1812 between the United States and Great Britain stem from flawed diplomacy. President James Madison inherited a divided party and unruly Congress from his predecessor, Thomas Jefferson. Lacking firm leadership, Madison was unable to create a commanding presence in office that would lead to effective relations with European nations. Madison eagerly accepted Napoleon’s declaration that he had imposed non-intercourse on England, souring any relations between the U.S. and Britain. In Britain, diplomacy was similarly ineffective. Already tied up in the Peninsular War in Spain and Portugal and Napoleon’s invasion of Russia, British government officials neglected the United States and dismissed any idea that the U.S. would

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.

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

Dying horses littered the roads and the advanced guard found little forage as Russians everywhere abandoned their homes. Napoleon knew that he needed to fight. At Smolensk, he set up for a battle and waited but the Russians, afraid of a trap steadily withdrew their troops from Smolensk and continued to retreat deeper into Russia. The only major battle in the Russian campaign proved that something was definitely lacking in Napoleon's judgment.

The artillery and small arms were years behind that of France. The Russian army was a conscription army, meaning that local farmers had to furnish a certain number of surfs for military service, as opposed to a professional, trained army where the government supplies the soldiers with all of their needs. An amazing half-million soldiers had enlisted in Napoleon’s Grand Armée (Saglamer, Beginning of the March). This was the largest army gathered for one single invasion. Russia’s army was out numbered 3:1 with only one hundred-seventy thousand soldiers. Not only was the Russian army not well trained, they were also ill equipped. Napoleon recognized that it would be difficult and extremely slow for Russia to mobilize her army due to her enormous size and weak infrastructure. If Napoleon invaded now, he knew that he could be well into the Russian territory before meeting any major opposition. On June 24, 1812, Napoleon began his fatal Russian campaign. The Grand Armée, led by Napoleon, crossed the Nieman River, into Russia. On the journey to Moscow, Napoleon met virtually no major opposition. The first stop in the campaign was Kovono. Early into the campaign, the Grand Armée was affected by a colic epidemic that claimed the life of nine thousand horses and thousands of soldiers (Web, Russian Embassy). This slowed the pace of the army. Harsh weather conditions caused the dry roads to turn to mud, making it extremely difficult to maneuver the

In the years of Napoleon’s reign, he engaged in numerous wars throughout Europe to dominate nations and force them under his control, resulting in the loss of hundreds of thousands of lives. Although, some may say most of the wars were not initiated by Napoleon himself, and he was only responding to a foreign threat. However, that statement is unfair because those countries only engaged in battle when they felt Napoleon’s spreading control threaten their nations. France was a powerful force and the weaker European countries allied together to stop Napoleon from overthrowing their governments and forcing his control on them.

Napoleon was an opportunistic leader who’s military genius was unmatched and his political prowess very solid, but his goal of overtaking Europe ended his power. Napoleon was a powerful military leader who was able to gain the respect and admiration of France through his military victories. He saw the opportunity to be the French leader and jumped at it, but his goal of a unified Europe hurt him. His ego also played a part in his fall from power in his ill-advised decision to have his brother rule Spain. Napoleon’s military power was so great that he came close to ruling Europe in its entirety before meeting the end. His rule over France was very successful and he was able to run a country very effectively. He was even able to rule over

Under Napoleon, France controlled almost all of Europe and Northern Africa as well as most of the Americas(through controlling Spain). Napoleon had tried to conquer all who insulted him, he was egotistical maniac. Although he attempted follow the values that the First French Revolutionists made Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite, Napoleon had set up multiple laws that gave some sense of freedom and equality to the people of france through the civil code also known as The Napoleonic Code.

Everyone knows that Napoleon was a great leader and commander but it is not as cut and dry as popular history makes it out to be. His great victory at Austerlitz cemented him as one of the greatest commanders in history. This battle is was a tactical masterpiece up there with Gaugamela and Cannae. However, there is more to analyze here than just the battle itself. Many aspects of war include mobilization, supply, training, moral, army structure etc. and all play a part in Napoleon’s victories and the creation of the French Empire. Another variable to consider is the quality of the armies led by Tsar Alexander I of Russia and the Holy Roman Emperor, Francis II of Austria. The focus here is to look at how these aspects played a role in

Berger and Luckmann (1967) claimed that the knowledge produced by social science as the historical and cultural product is not absolute and superior. So, we cannot offer a final social knowledge, but counting terms with varying social reality are required. In fact, one historical event can be described by different norms. For example, Marxists believe that Napoleon drove the Russian revolution in 1917. (Mannheim, K.1997) This statement could be seen as an agreement of this historical event. However, in the case of people who suffered from the conflict would rather consider this event as ‘Napoleon invaded Russia in 1917’. Therefore, we got different knowledge from one social event, and this knowledge is produced and reproduced with ideology