Wars Against Napoleon: Debunking the Myth of the Napoleonic Wars

by Michel Franceschi, Ben Weider, général Michel Franceschi

Book Overview

Popular and scholarly history presents a one-dimensional image of Napoleon as an inveterate instigator of war who repeatedly sought large-scale military conquests. General Franceschi and Ben Weider dismantle this false conclusion in The Wars Against Napoleon, a brilliantly written and researched study that turns our understanding of the French emperor on its head.

Avoiding the simplistic clich s and rudimentary caricatures many historians use...

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 1932714375
• ISBN13: 9781932714371
• Release Date: December 2007
• Publisher: Savas Beatie
• Length: 264 Pages
• Weight: 0.95 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.9" x 6.4" x 9.3"

Customer Reviews

Can't Argue with the Facts...

Like it or not, Napoleon has been the victim of a 200 year old smear campaign that still exists today. For the simple reason that if Napoleon was right, then they must've been wrong, Britain (and to a lesser extent the rest of the Allied countries) have made it a top priority throughout the years to make sure people think it was all Napoleons fault for the violence of the early 1800's. And they are good at it. The Britons are nothing if not brilliant diplomats and their rhetoric and version of events have become the commonly held views of Napoloeon for the rest of us who don't really study the man. Even the fact that Napoleon was uncommonly short is British propaganda made to trivialize the man. For the record, Napoleon was 5'6" which was average to even slightly above average height for the day. The Brits used a different system of measurements for measuring Napoleon and even though the truth is right their for anyone who cares to find it, people still believe Napoleon was an uncommonly short man. Gotta give props to British propaganda. The thing about Napoleon is that one has to get a number of different viewpoints in order to get a good impression of the man. If you mainly read books from the British perspective, you will have a mostly negative view of him. If you only read books from the French perspective, you will have a mostly positive view of him. But again, the facts are out their for those who care to know and this book brings together the facts about Napoleons role in the wars he was involved in and the type of government he instituted. You can't argue with these facts, whether its in your best interest to positively or negatively portray Napoleon. This book clearly shows that the commonly held view of Napoleon as the main cause of the wars he was in is FALSE. Again, the reason why we all think that is because the British have basically dominated our views on history, especially concerning this time period. As stated above, if Napoleon was right in his endeavors, then the British would have to be wrong, and there's no way they can accept that. The armies of the Allied countries on mainland Europe were basically mercenary armies for England and one could say that it was the English who were beaten at Austerlitz, Jena, Friedland, and Wagram. Read this book if you want to add to your understanding of Napoleon. If you are comfortable with the easy view of Napoleon as the person in the wrong, then consider yourself another paid mercenary of George III.

THE ENGLISH COUNTER-REVOLUTIONARY WAR

The greatest threat to peace in Europe in the early nineteenth century was the British Cabinet. With its millions in subsidies it fought a mainly proxy war against France before Napoleon, and France under Napoleon. It was other countries that basically did the dying for British ends. England had been fighting France for decades and, still smarting over the loss of the American colonies, who won their freedom with crucial French backing, the last thing it wanted was for ideas of freedom and equality to spread amongst its own down-trodden people. The British population was held in contempt by its autocratic, aristocratic, oligarchic masters. The French Revolution was a match hovering over the keg of liberty and the British Cabinet was determined to put it out. Napoleon solidified the gains of the Revolution. He was the only one strong enough and pragmatic enough to heal the wounds of French society and under him France became a serious player in the field of international relations once again. The ancient monarchies were terrified that under his leadership, the liberalisation fostered by revolutionary ideas would spread to their own realms. Hence they pocketed the English bribes and fostered a series of coalitions that were to expunge the French leader and all he stood for from the map of Europe. In their excellent book Franceschi and Weider raise dozens of points, particularly in regard to the diplomacy of the time, that will be a real eye-opener to British readers. Especially telling are the references to the British press and Opposition in 1815 who said then, that the war of that year against Napoleon was totally unjustified. And Marie-Louise's letter to her father, expressing her anguish that he could be contemplating war against his own son-in-law is very revealing - especially as she says the English were probably behind it. One reviewer above states sneeringly that the authors blame the loss at Waterloo on a bad thunderstorm. They do not say that, they rightly comment that the French were outnumbered. In fact, although Wellington hung on grimly, it was the arrival of 45,000 Prussians, 7,000 of whom died at the hands of the Young Guard at Placenoit, that sealed the Emperor's fate. Not many of those Prussians went to Eton by the way. As a reader of dozens of books on this period, I can honestly say that this is the first one I have come across that looks at things from Napoleon's perspective. Far from being called The Napoleonic Wars, the period 1799-1815 would be better dubbed, The English Mercenary Wars. JOHN TARTTELIN M.A., FINS

LIBRARY JOURNAL REVIEW

"According to these authors, it is a myth of the Napoleonic wars that Napoléon was a megalomaniacal conqueror who bled Europe dry in order to satisfy his insatiable love for war. Certainly, such is the most widely printed and accepted description of Napoléon's motive. After all, history is written by the victors. In this book, however, retired French general Franceschi and Weider (coauthor with Sten Forshufvud, Assassination at St. Helena Revisited) present a compelling revisionist portrait of Napoléon as fundamentally pacifist. They base this on three sound themes: first, that the European monarchies were thoroughly opposed to the continuance of revolutionary France; second, that Napoléon made constant determined efforts to avoid the inevitable conflicts; and third, that Napoléon never declared war, as he himself stated in exile on St. Helena. In each of these areas the authors argue strongly, persuasively, and intellectually for what is, essentially, the other side of the usual story. They will surely provoke debate within the historical community wherever there is interest in this period. Recommended for all libraries adding to their Napoleonic collections. (Illustrations not seen.)" - David Lee Poremba, Keiser Univ., Orlando, FL, Library Journal

Napoleon and his many accomplishments

I have just read the outstanding book titled, "The Wars Against Napoleon," written by Dr. Ben Weider and General Michel Franceschi. Placing Napoleon's civil, diplomatic and military accomplishments in the context of a European counter revolution, Dr. Weider and General Franceschi make a strong case against the widely held image of Napoleon as a war-loving conqueror. Instead they argue that Napoleon was a man of peace, forced into war by an implacable old regime that viewed him as the incarnation of the revolution. Broad in scope, while sharp in focus, this iconoclastic book is sure to stimulate passionate debate amongst specialists and non-specialists alike. Sincerely, Professor Rafe Blaufarb Institute of Napoleon and the French Revolution Florida State University

Was Napoleon Really a 'Warmonger'?

The president of the International Napoleonic Society, Canadian entrepreneur Dr. Ben Weider has done it again. The world's foremost Napoleonic expert took on - and beat! -- the entrenched battalions of the "Napoleon-istas" (French academics who consider anything even remotely Napoleonic to be their exclusive "turf") with his 1982 book, The Murder of Napoleon, and the society's 20-page, 2004 report, The Poisoning of Napoleon: The Final Proof, that proved beyond any reasonable doubt through exhaustive scientific testing that the emperor's 1821 death was indeed due to systematic arsenic poisoning. Now, in his latest book, The Wars Against Napoleon: Debunking the Myth of the Napoleonic Wars, Weider teams up with General Michel Franceschi to take on and destroy an even bigger Napoleonic myth. The authors explain, "Among the numerous conventional images concerning Napoleon, that of the megalomaniac conqueror drunk on glory is fixed in the collective imagination. Indefatigable warrior, Napoleon supposedly sacrificed world peace to his insatiable personal ambition. ... But is this historically accurate? We do not believe that it is." In fact, as Weider and Franceschi prove, even the long-entrenched term "Napoleonic Wars," itself, is not only misleading, it's downright wrong! Instead, the authors clearly demonstrate that the armies amassed by the reactionary monarchies of Europe literally fought "wars against Napoleon" to counter the threat he posed to maintaining their l'ancien regimes. Horrified at the prospect of the progressive ideals let loose by revolutionary France in 1789 spreading throughout Europe to infect their own subjugated masses, Europe's monarchs marshaled their forces to strangle the infant revolution in its cradle. When that failed - and especially after Napoleon emerged and began to regularly thrash the monarchies' armies - Europe's frightened kings and princes formed a series of military coalitions that waged "wars against Napoleon" for nearly two decades. The authors set about methodically to destroy long held assumptions about Napoleon, and lay out their argument in three sections. The first part of the book is vital to understanding the context within which Napoleon emerged, as it "presents the intractable belligerent situation toward which the First Consul found himself inexorably forced upon his arrival in power, and from which he was never able to escape." As Weider and Franceschi show, "Napoleon was already condemned to perpetual warfare from the moment of his arrival in power." Once this fundamental characteristic of the political situation in Europe is understood, the explanation of why Napoleon found himself at war during most of his reign is self-evident. In Part Two, the authors delve deeper into Napoleon's own personality and beliefs as it "brings to light the fundamentally pacifist character of Napoleon's politics, founded on his intangible principle of avoiding conflicts." Skeptics may raise an eyebrow at Napoleon be