• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Strategy, Logistics, Tactics or Leadership: Which factor was the most important as a turning point in Napoleon's fortunes?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Strategy, Logistics, Tactics or Leadership: Which factor was the most important as a turning point in Napoleon's fortunes? Up until the winter of 1812 Napoleon's military career had been largely successful. Apart from a defeat in Egypt and the continuing problems in Spain, things had gone well. He had gained control of most of Central and Western Europe, defeating Austria and Prussia. The only country that remained consistently hostile to him was Great Britain. However, the Russian campaign, and in particular the decision to retreat from Moscow, marked the biggest change in Napoleon's fortunes. From now on his would be a career of defeats dotted with minor victories, rather than vice versa. Napoleon's defeat in Russia had many contributing factors. But the most important was the Leadership decisions of Napoleon himself. His decision to retreat from Moscow during the winter of 1812 lead not only to his defeat in Russia, but also to his overall defeat in Europe. The issue of supply was one of many problems during the French invasion of Russia. All the things necessary for the army to function had to be transported by cart, there being no railways. ...read more.

Middle

Napoleon's most famous military strategy was to try to occupy a central position between two of the enemy's armies, and then defeat each one individually. In the Russian campaign he did not have a chance to do this. The Russian commander, Kutusov, only engaged Napoleon directly once, at the battle of Borodino. Kutusov did not split his army; meaning Napoleon could not take up his desired central position. Still hoping for a decisive victory Napoleon ordered a frontal assault, he did not plan carefully, apparently expecting little resistance from the Russians. As mentioned above, the battle was indecisive. If Napoleon had planned the battle with more care, listening to the advice of Marshal Davout who urged him to send in a strong flanking attack, then possibly the outcome would have been different. A French victory would have given Napoleon his desired decisive victory, and the Russians would most likely have signed a peace agreement. In terms of Grand strategy, the initial decision to invade Russia can be seen as very important. If this decision had not been made, the Grande Armee would have remained intact, and Napoleon's fate could have been very different. ...read more.

Conclusion

His campaigns in Spain also contributed significantly to his eventual defeat. Ever since the French occupation of Spain in 1807, the forces stationed there had been under constant attack from Spanish Guerrillas, who accounted for 100 deaths per day during the French occupation. Although these losses not as rapid or on the same scale as the defeat in Russia, they were a constant drain on Napoleon's resources. Napoleon also suffered an early defeat in Egypt, where the Royal Navy prevented a victory. But this early campaign was less important than those that came later, and didn't affect his career in any significant way. The largest factor contributing to Napoleon's eventual defeat in Europe was his failed invasion of Russia. The Grande Armee's strategies and tactics were only put to the test once, at the battle of Borodino, where the outcome was indecisive. Therefore they did not play a significant role in their eventual defeat. Logistics played a part in increasing the losses of Napoleon's forces, but alone it did not have a major effect on the outcome of the campaign. Napoleon's invasion failed mainly because of his decision to retreat from Moscow at the end of 1812, instead of garrisoning his troops there for the winter. This decision was based on Napoleon's personality and leadership traits. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. "To what extent did napoleon lose the battle of Waterloo due to his own ...

    When arriving at the battle in Ligny, Drouet was marching on France's left flank throwing Napoleon off guard, for he was expecting Ney's force on the Prussian right flank.

  2. How successful was Napoleon III?

    promise of getting Venetia and Luxembourg and when Luxembourg was not delivered to France Napoleon felt cheated and France was humiliated. This although they were big failures they merely weakened France, however it did show Napoleon in a very bad way as he had been guilty of hubris (which means an arrogant pride inviting disaster)

  1. Reasons for Napoleon's Success (to 1807).

    This increased the reliance on raw recruits and non-French conscripts. They were less reliable. * Opponents had copied Napoleon's tactics. They used artillery and speed, and were careful not to be lured into open battle. * Napoleon's generals lacked experience of taking the initiative.

  2. Why did Napoleon lose the Battle of Waterloo?

    Although Drouet thought that Ney needed him more urgently8, his presence would have been valuable at either battle. Soult's ability to follow orders and communicate between the two divisions of the army may have also cost Napoleon the battle. Soult's promptness and clarity in the messages would have made the course of events that day happen more fluently.

  1. "Blundering to glory". How far is this an accurate description of the campaigns of ...

    enemies, an over confident Bonaparte spread his forces thinly in the Marengo campaign to prevent the Austrians from escaping. He did not however plan for any aggressive movement from the Austrians under the experienced, General Melas. This underestimation of the enemy almost cost him his army and the Marengo campaign

  2. The Battle of Britain

    29th stating that no effort should be spared to take as many French off at Dunkirk in the operation. But it was on May 26th1940 at 6:58pm that the Admiralty in London cabled Ramsey at Dover Castle with the urgent message that "Operation Dynamo" was to commence.

  1. The battle of Britain was an important turning point in the second world war ...

    Britain as they thought that they did not know that they would come and so would do well in the bombings, but Britain was ready and able to fight. Germany also gave Britain a huge advantage as when Hitler changed his tactics and decided to attack London.

  2. The Impact of Stalins Leadership in the USSR, 1924 1941. Extensive notes

    Loval party organisations were told to expel people from the party for being inactive and the large majority of those dismissed because of this were women. Soviet women and the family in the 1930s: 1. There was no significant improvement in women?s status or conditions.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work