Napoleon Bonaparte

[danielpalos]

Should have developed flying artillery, as the U.S. used against Mexico, and Frederich the Great had started to develop, among others.

How would that have helped at Waterloo?

 

[danielpalos]

In my opinion, lancers should have been effective against infantry squares; unlike cavalry.

If there weren't musketry and grenadiers in the squares, they might have been. Napoleon's use of artillery was original, effective, and hard to beat.

He could not use them to his advantage at Waterloo due to the weather.

 

[danielpalos]

One of my favorite military figures, but not a favorite politician. I've spent many enjoyable hours, sometimes days, gaming the battle of Borodino and Waterloo, especially the SPI version Wellington's Victory. I still have my collection of 15mm miniatures stashed away in a big locker in the store room.

Would Wellington have attacked, if Napoleon, knowing he could not implement a timely attack on Wellington's defensive position, focused instead on the Prussians, then returned to Wellington when the weather was more favorable?

 

[yiostheoy]

Bonsoir, The story of Napoléon 1 that rise in power to become Emperor of the French

Napoleon Bonaparte (1769 - 1821)

One of the greatest military leaders in history, and emperor of France he conquered much of Europe.

View attachment 103168


Napoleon Bonaparte was born on 15 August 1769 in Corsica into a gentry family. Educated at military school, he was rapidly promoted and in 1796, was made commander of the French army in Italy, where he forced Austria and its allies to make peace. In 1798, Napoleon conquered Ottoman-ruled Egypt in an attempt to strike at British trade routes with India. He was stranded when his fleet was destroyed by the British at the Battle of the Nile.France now faced a new coalition - Austria and Russia had allied with Britain.

Napoleon returned to Paris where the government was in crisis. In a coup d'etat in November 1799, Napoleon became first consul. In 1802, he was made consul for life and two years later, emperor. He oversaw the centralisation of government, the creation of the Bank of France, the reinstatement of Roman Catholicism as the state religion and law reform with the Code Napoleon.

In 1800, he defeated the Austrians at Marengo. He then negotiated a general European peace which established French power on the continent. In 1803 Britain resumed war with France, later joined by Russia and Austria. Britain inflicted a naval defeat on the French at Trafalgar (1805) so Napoleon abandoned plans to invade England and turned on the Austro-Russian forces, defeating them at Austerlitz later the same year. He gained much new territory, including annexation of Prussian lands which ostensibly gave him control of Europe. The Holy Roman Empire was dissolved, Holland and Westphalia created, and over the next 5 years, Napoleon's relatives and loyalists were installed as leaders (in Holland, Westphalia, Italy, Naples, Spain and Sweden).

In 1810, he had his childless marriage to Josephine de Beauharnais annulled and married the daughter of the Austrian emperor in the hope of having an heir. A son, Napoleon, was born a year later.

The Peninsular War began in 1808. Costly French defeats over the next five years drained French military resources. Napoleon's invasion of Russia in 1812 resulted in a disastrous retreat. The tide started to turn in favour of the allies and in March 1814, Paris fell. Napoleon went into exile on the Mediterranean island of Elba. In March 1815 he escaped and marched on the French capital. The Battle of Waterloo ended his brief reign. The British imprisoned him on the remote Atlantic island of St. Helena where he died on 5 May 1821.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/bonaparte_napoleon.shtml

I believe it is safe to say Napoleon (the 1st) was THE GREATEST military leader in history. There are others who made the most of their own times, like Sargon The Great, Alexander The Great, Julius Caesar, Sun Tzu, George Washington, Arthur Wellesley, Ulysses Grant, Robert E Lee, Ike, and Douglas MacArthur, however all of them pales in comparison with Napoleon himself.

Many of the policies and procedures that Napoleon invented we still use today. Even Wellesley who faced Napoleon and defeated him twice agreed that on a field of battle his hat alone was worth 50 thousand men. The statement is actually attributed to Marshall Blucher but is now associated with Wellesley instead.

 

[yiostheoy]

Would Wellington have attacked, if Napoleon, knowing he could not implement a timely attack on Wellington's defensive position, focused instead on the Prussians, then returned to Wellington when the weather was more favorable?

While modern military theory favors blitzkrieg in the attack, at the time of Napoleon, Wellington, and Blucher it was the defense that was stronger.

However Napoleon normally outmaneuvered his opponents so that it seemed like Napoleon on offense was always stronger than anyone else on defense.

At Waterloo however Wellington proved that the defense is stronger than the offense between opponents of about equal strength.

Blucher showing up at Waterloo to outflank Napoleon and reinforce Wellington tipped the battle in Wellington's favor and caused the French to retreat in chaos. The French troops saw it coming -- they were about to be outflanked and slaughtered by the Prussians.

 

[yiostheoy]

Bonsoir, The story of Napoléon 1 that rise in power to become Emperor of the French

Napoleon Bonaparte (1769 - 1821)

One of the greatest military leaders in history, and emperor of France he conquered much of Europe.

View attachment 103168


Napoleon Bonaparte was born on 15 August 1769 in Corsica into a gentry family. Educated at military school, he was rapidly promoted and in 1796, was made commander of the French army in Italy, where he forced Austria and its allies to make peace. In 1798, Napoleon conquered Ottoman-ruled Egypt in an attempt to strike at British trade routes with India. He was stranded when his fleet was destroyed by the British at the Battle of the Nile.France now faced a new coalition - Austria and Russia had allied with Britain.

Napoleon returned to Paris where the government was in crisis. In a coup d'etat in November 1799, Napoleon became first consul. In 1802, he was made consul for life and two years later, emperor. He oversaw the centralisation of government, the creation of the Bank of France, the reinstatement of Roman Catholicism as the state religion and law reform with the Code Napoleon.

In 1800, he defeated the Austrians at Marengo. He then negotiated a general European peace which established French power on the continent. In 1803 Britain resumed war with France, later joined by Russia and Austria. Britain inflicted a naval defeat on the French at Trafalgar (1805) so Napoleon abandoned plans to invade England and turned on the Austro-Russian forces, defeating them at Austerlitz later the same year. He gained much new territory, including annexation of Prussian lands which ostensibly gave him control of Europe. The Holy Roman Empire was dissolved, Holland and Westphalia created, and over the next 5 years, Napoleon's relatives and loyalists were installed as leaders (in Holland, Westphalia, Italy, Naples, Spain and Sweden).

In 1810, he had his childless marriage to Josephine de Beauharnais annulled and married the daughter of the Austrian emperor in the hope of having an heir. A son, Napoleon, was born a year later.

The Peninsular War began in 1808. Costly French defeats over the next five years drained French military resources. Napoleon's invasion of Russia in 1812 resulted in a disastrous retreat. The tide started to turn in favour of the allies and in March 1814, Paris fell. Napoleon went into exile on the Mediterranean island of Elba. In March 1815 he escaped and marched on the French capital. The Battle of Waterloo ended his brief reign. The British imprisoned him on the remote Atlantic island of St. Helena where he died on 5 May 1821.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/bonaparte_napoleon.shtml

In my opinion, lancers should have been effective against infantry squares; unlike cavalry.

Infantry with rifles can form squares and shoot down lancers.

Infantry can do the same against cavalry with swords.

This is why the rifle made the cavalry obsolete. This became obvious during WW1 when rifles became repeating and machine guns and barbed wire also evolved.

 

[yiostheoy]

Yes, there is so much to say about Napoléon

I use to go to this forum create by me and my friend from Corse.and at the forum there is a lot of historien of Napoléon

Passion Napoléon1 :: Forum consacré à Napoléon 1er

In military officers' schools we still study Napoleon's strategies and tactics all over the world.

The modern concept of offensive doctrine is that you must have a 3 to 1 advantage in numbers in order to have the minimum advantage required to overrun a normal defensive position. Of course the geography can change everything and sometimes even 10 to 1 is not enough.

 

[danielpalos]

Would Wellington have attacked, if Napoleon, knowing he could not implement a timely attack on Wellington's defensive position, focused instead on the Prussians, then returned to Wellington when the weather was more favorable?

While modern military theory favors blitzkrieg in the attack, at the time of Napoleon, Wellington, and Blucher it was the defense that was stronger.

However Napoleon normally outmaneuvered his opponents so that it seemed like Napoleon on offense was always stronger than anyone else on defense.

At Waterloo however Wellington proved that the defense is stronger than the offense between opponents of about equal strength.

Blucher showing up at Waterloo to outflank Napoleon and reinforce Wellington tipped the battle in Wellington's favor and caused the French to retreat in chaos. The French troops saw it coming -- they were about to be outflanked and slaughtered by the Prussians.

In other words, the actual and immediate threat, was from the Prussians.

 

[danielpalos]

Bonsoir, The story of Napoléon 1 that rise in power to become Emperor of the French

Napoleon Bonaparte (1769 - 1821)

One of the greatest military leaders in history, and emperor of France he conquered much of Europe.

View attachment 103168


Napoleon Bonaparte was born on 15 August 1769 in Corsica into a gentry family. Educated at military school, he was rapidly promoted and in 1796, was made commander of the French army in Italy, where he forced Austria and its allies to make peace. In 1798, Napoleon conquered Ottoman-ruled Egypt in an attempt to strike at British trade routes with India. He was stranded when his fleet was destroyed by the British at the Battle of the Nile.France now faced a new coalition - Austria and Russia had allied with Britain.

Napoleon returned to Paris where the government was in crisis. In a coup d'etat in November 1799, Napoleon became first consul. In 1802, he was made consul for life and two years later, emperor. He oversaw the centralisation of government, the creation of the Bank of France, the reinstatement of Roman Catholicism as the state religion and law reform with the Code Napoleon.

In 1800, he defeated the Austrians at Marengo. He then negotiated a general European peace which established French power on the continent. In 1803 Britain resumed war with France, later joined by Russia and Austria. Britain inflicted a naval defeat on the French at Trafalgar (1805) so Napoleon abandoned plans to invade England and turned on the Austro-Russian forces, defeating them at Austerlitz later the same year. He gained much new territory, including annexation of Prussian lands which ostensibly gave him control of Europe. The Holy Roman Empire was dissolved, Holland and Westphalia created, and over the next 5 years, Napoleon's relatives and loyalists were installed as leaders (in Holland, Westphalia, Italy, Naples, Spain and Sweden).

In 1810, he had his childless marriage to Josephine de Beauharnais annulled and married the daughter of the Austrian emperor in the hope of having an heir. A son, Napoleon, was born a year later.

The Peninsular War began in 1808. Costly French defeats over the next five years drained French military resources. Napoleon's invasion of Russia in 1812 resulted in a disastrous retreat. The tide started to turn in favour of the allies and in March 1814, Paris fell. Napoleon went into exile on the Mediterranean island of Elba. In March 1815 he escaped and marched on the French capital. The Battle of Waterloo ended his brief reign. The British imprisoned him on the remote Atlantic island of St. Helena where he died on 5 May 1821.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/bonaparte_napoleon.shtml

In my opinion, lancers should have been effective against infantry squares; unlike cavalry.

Infantry with rifles can form squares and shoot down lancers.

Infantry can do the same against cavalry with swords.

This is why the rifle made the cavalry obsolete. This became obvious during WW1 when rifles became repeating and machine guns and barbed wire also evolved.

depends on the lance and the tactic; two lances could have been employed, like pilum, to break the square and then melee like traditional cavalry once inside the square.

 

[yiostheoy]

He went into Russia with 600,000 men and came out with 40,000.

Same as Adolf Hitler.

God has always protected the Russians with Russian winters.

 

[yiostheoy]

depends on the lance and the tactic; two lances could have been employed, like pilum, to break the square and then melee like traditional cavalry once inside the square.

You cannot break an infantry square except with other infantry or with long range shelling by artillery.

Cavalry with horses and lances or swords cannot do it.

Artillery is ideal actually, since the squares are condensed.

But if you fired your artillery upon an infantry square you will also kill your own cavalry.

The infantry would never form squares unless attached by horses.

Otherwise the infantry will be drawn up in lines or in skirmishers.

The US Civil War promoted skirmisher formations rather than lines and squares because rifles had become so much more accurate.

In modern warfare we use skirmisher formations now for lite infantry on the ground (deployed from their mechanized transport vehicles).

 

[Moonglow]

Except the French used infantry column tactics...

 

[Moonglow]

He went into Russia with 600,000 men and came out with 40,000.

Same as Adolf Hitler.

God has always protected the Russians with Russian winters.

It didn't help when Genghis Khan took over Russia..

 

[yiostheoy]

In other words, the actual and immediate threat, was from the Prussians.

Not really.

Blucher became a de facto reserve once he showed up for the big battle and he threw himself into the fray which when the French saw him coming they broke and ran.

The immediate threat was Wellington's reinforced defensive position -- he could have launched an attack at any time.

Blucher became an additional overwhelming threat.

Blucher showed up just in time.

It was pure luck for Wellington.

It was bad luck for Napoleon.

It is called "the fog of war".

 

[yiostheoy]

It didn't help when Genghis Khan took over Russia..

Those Chinese fokkers have always had massive hoards.

That's why we need belt fed machine guns, tanks, attack helo's, and air to ground attack aircraft.

 

[yiostheoy]

Except the French used infantry column tactics...

Yup back in those times everybody did.

It was called "Napoleonic".

Robert E Lee tried something like this at Gettysburg and we all know what happened there.

 

[danielpalos]

He went into Russia with 600,000 men and came out with 40,000.

Same as Adolf Hitler.

God has always protected the Russians with Russian winters.

The US knows, the Russians are Only intimidated, by us having an Army Group, in reserve.

 

[Moonglow]

Except the French used infantry column tactics...

Yup back in those times everybody did.

It was called "Napoleonic".

Robert E Lee tried something like this at Gettysburg and we all know what happened there.

The Anglo-English used line tactics, which did give them better firepower, while the French used a heavier artillery...

 

[danielpalos]

depends on the lance and the tactic; two lances could have been employed, like pilum, to break the square and then melee like traditional cavalry once inside the square.

You cannot break an infantry square except with other infantry or with long range shelling by artillery.

Cavalry with horses and lances or swords cannot do it.

Artillery is ideal actually, since the squares are condensed.

But if you fired your artillery upon an infantry square you will also kill your own cavalry.

The infantry would never form squares unless attached by horses.

Otherwise the infantry will be drawn up in lines or in skirmishers.

The US Civil War promoted skirmisher formations rather than lines and squares because rifles had become so much more accurate.

In modern warfare we use skirmisher formations now for lite infantry on the ground (deployed from their mechanized transport vehicles).

You claim that; but, ranged attack by lancers who can then close like cavalry, could have made a difference.

Why do you believe lancers could not effectively engage an infantry square, at range, with lances, before closing with sabers?

 

[yiostheoy]

Is Napoleon dead poisoned?
In 1801, a Swedish dentist, Dr. Forshufvud, published a book entitled "Napoleon a- It was poisoned, a work that goes unnoticed at first.
But when the Glasgow Department of Forensic Medicine examines five specimens of the Emperor's hair, they all contain considerable quantities of arsenic. The Napoleonic legend began to spread in the monarchical France of the first half of the nineteenth century, notably on the occasion of the triumphal return of the Emperor's ashes to the Invalides in 1840. The "mystery" Napoleon " Is never really dissipated.
What did Napoleon die? From poisoning to arsenic, for some; From cancer to stomach for others.
The latest study reinforces the official version.


The End of Napoleon

After the defeat of Europe in 1814, Napoleon was exiled to the island of Elba, near the Tuscan coast. He escaped on 1 March 1815. Taking advantage of the clumsiness of the royalists, the new masters of France, and the dissensions between the victors, he took power in Paris. But he is worn out, he no longer believes in his star, his best generals are dead.
English and Prussians beat him one last time at Waterloo on June 18, 1815. In Paris, he was forced to abdicate, and a new peace brought France back to its borders in 1792.

The coronation of Napoleon I by Pius VII and the coronation of the Empress Josephine in the cathedral Notre-Dame de Paris, December 2, 1804. Oil painting of Louis David. (Louvre Museum, Paris).
The fallen Emperor surrenders to the English, hoping in their magnanimity. They exiled him on a lost island in the Atlantic Ocean, close to the Tropic of Capricorn, 1,900 kilometers from Africa and 2,900 from Brazil: Saint Helena, a 16-kilometer volcanic block, Not go beyond a narrower perimeter. Three thousand officers and men of troops watch him there.
He then has 6 years to live.
He arrived there on 15 October 1815 and died there on 5 May 1821.

Place of detention of the Emperor.

The island that serves as a prison is unhealthy, the heat is heavy, rain and frequent mists. The jailer, Sir Hudson Lowe (1769-1844), is a mediocre haunted by the possible flight of Napoleon. To prevent it, he takes the most fastidious and vexatious measures. Napoleon was cut off from all his loved ones: Marie-Louise, whom he waited in vain for, his son, a prisoner of Austria, his mother Letizia. His life took place in the midst of the disputes between Madame de Montholon and Madame Bertrand, women of the generals who had followed him to St. Helena.

Napoleon at the Museum of London.

Emmanuel de Las Cases (1766-1842), chamberlain, to whom he dictated his Memoires, was to leave him in 1816.
But the fallen emperor became the hero of revolutionary France and Europe, the martyr of the Holy Alliance of kings who oppressed the people.
Paradoxically enough, he who had always fought liberalism became its emblem.


Arguments about poisoning
Here is an excerpt from the autopsy report of the Emperor carried out by François Antommarchi.
9) ... I observed that the adhesion of the concave face of the left lobe of the liver formed a hole of diameter about three lines (6 mm 3/4) in the anterior face of the stomach, Near its right end.
Having opened the stomach behind its great curvature, I observed that it was filled in part with a blackish liquid substance, with a pungent and disagreeable odor.
11. Having removed the said liquid, I observed a very extensive cancerous ulcer, which occupied especially the upper part of the internal surface of the stomach, and extended from the orifice of the cardia to about an inch of the pylorum .
12) On the edge of this ulcer towards the pylorum, I recognized the above hole produced by the ulcerous corrosion of the walls of the stomach.
13) The ulcerous walls of the stomach were considerably swollen and hardened. "


As can be seen, this report speaks of a large ulceration of the stomach that degenerated into cancer.

Tomb of Napoleon.

Forshufvud, in 1961, forgets the ulcer, which is not the direct cause of death, and focuses on cancer to remove it promptly. A malignant tumor would have made his victim considerably thinner, and the layer of fat on the belly of Napoleon's body was still about five centimeters.
On the other hand, the victims of slow arsenical poisoning may gain weight; In low dose, the poison has long been used as a stimulant. Moreover, an English doctor underlines the almost absence of hair on the body of the Emperor, which may also be a symptom of arsenic poisoning; As well as the good state of preservation of the body in 1840, when it is exhumed to be brought back to France.
But it is true that his bowels had been removed, so that he had undergone a beginning of embalming.

Imperial throne at Fontainebleau.

On the strength of these indications, the Swedish dentist attributes to arsenic all the health problems of Napoleon: from a strange crisis, close to epilepsy, in 1805, through his stomach pains to his eczema at The island of Elba and its urinary difficulties in Waterloo.
Of course, each time, the details of the disorders may suggest poisoning, but many other medical explanations are possible
It should be noted that Forshufvud is not the first to defend the theory of poisoning. Before him, René Maury, has also based on certain medical reports to affirm that this death is not natural

Bust of Napoleon.

Forshufvud, moreover, returns to the conclusions of the autopsy, which indicate that the stomach of Napoleon was full of a kind of coffee grounds. He concludes a mortal hemorrhage, linked to the corrosion of the entire stomach wall, characteristic of all mercury poisonings.
It therefore assumes that after years of poisoning with arsenic the assassin has switched to another poison. It is precisely the cyanide of mercury, a formidable product, formed in the stomach itself by the encounter between a drug, calomel, prescribed in large doses in the hope of clearing the intestines, and a Beverage actually consumed by the Emperor, a barley syrup made from bitter almonds. In the absence of barley and bitter almonds, simple cooking salt could have produced the same reaction

Remains to find a culprit, and a mobile. The English had scarcely any access to their prisoner; few of his companions remained with him from beginning to end. The Grand Marshal Bertrand was unanimously put out of the question.
There remains General Montholon, who would have followed Napoleon to escape his creditors, to serve as an agent to the restored French monarchy, which could not feel tranquil as long as Napoleon lived, and to have himself laid down on an interesting testament.
It may be added that others, moreover, without the slightest proof, have glossed over the relations between Napoleon and the wife of the general. This vaudeville could degenerate into drama.

Napoleon Passing the Pass of the Great Saint Bernard, Baroque Museum, Vienna.

The trouble is that Montholon never abjured his Bonapartism. According to the nephew, after the uncle, in their darkest hours, he was later a companion of the future captivity of Napoleon III. Moreover, he did not approach the Emperor before 1815 and therefore can not be the mysterious poisoner who then raged for ten years.

Why so much arsenic?

There are several possible explanations for the traces of arsenic in the hair.
Alain Decaux proposed a satisfactory solution. We have seen that arsenic, in small doses, was prescribed as a stimulant. The necessities of his life may have compelled Napoleon to use them, to abuse them, sometimes to endure the secondary effects of it. It is this arsenic which the English scientists have brought to light. It is simple, perhaps too , But more convincing than hypotheses requiring many poisons, and many poisoners

Statue of Napoleon in Ajaccio, Corsica.

Arsenic may also include foods or mineral water that contain them naturally.

The latest study on the "mystery" Napoleon
A team of doctors, pathologists and gastroenterologists from several countries studied all the autopsy reports and the testimonies of those who were present during the last weeks of the Emperor's life

Passage of the Berezina by the French army, at the end of November 1812, during the campaign of Russia. Etching by Johann Adam Klein after Franz von Habermann. (Institut de France, Thiers Library, Paris).
They then used a database of known pathologies. Thus, they identified the disease suffered by Napoleon.
For them, there is no doubt. The Emperor died of a major gastric hemorrhage which is the direct result of stomach cancer.
This cancer, untreated, developed as a result of an ulcer which itself was the fruit of chronic gastritis. There is therefore no mystery about the death of Napoleon, no more criminal hand Than conspiracy.

Source:
Les grandes énigmes, éditions Larousse. Les plus célèbres mystères de l'histoire, Sélection du Reader's Digest. Science & Vie N°1074

Back in those times when anyone died they always thought it might be due to poisoning.

However appendicitis, gall bladder disease, liver disease, and pancreatic disease all have the same signs and symptoms of poisoning.

I suspect all these deaths were simply natural and not due to poisoning.