How Far Can Napoleon's Military Success from 1796-1800 Be Explained by the Weaknesses of His Opponents?

1458 Words6 Pages
How far can Napoleon's military success from 1796-1800 be explained by the weaknesses of his opponents? A lot of Napoleon’s military success can be attributed to the weaknesses of his opponents but his own strengths and that of his men are a also a larger factor. From the years 1796-1800 Napoleons’ forces took part in 35 battles, the large majority of the battles were victories for the French. These battles were spread over the years occurred throughout: Egypt, Italy and, Syria. The success of the French troops can be based on many factors: Napoleon’s “new” - but very successful- way of making war, the superb commanders (Masséna and Augurea) Napoleon had underneath him and, the poor organisation and communication between his opponents. For example: the British and Austria had no treaties but were supposedly allies. In 1796 Napoleon newly appointed as the head of the Army in Italy quickly set his soldiers into action as a way to boost their morale and so Napoleon could show his capabilities to silence those who doubted him both alongside him and back in Paris. The army had been poorly looked after and had not won a battle in years. So he quickly secured a loan from his friends his the Directory (Barras) and spent it all on equipment and supplies. Then the first Italian campaign began. A few weeks later his soldiers descended from the Alps onto the unsuspecting Austrian armies. Napoleon had employed a new- new to the battle field but was a theory long before his time- of breaking his army up and attacking from all different directions. This was seen as “intolerable way of making war” by one Piedmontese officer. As were his relentless and unforgiving attacks, he pursued the Austrian’s back into Austria which was seen as intolerable by the allies and so the Austrians sued for peace. His army was also very mobile, they could move up to 30 miles were as the enemy
Open Document