Napoleon was the first general to effectively utilize nationalism. Before him, armies were made up of serfs who just happened to live and work on the land of one of the warring factions. Part of the reason Napoleon was so successful (aside from being an incredible general) was the fact that he was able to get his armies to believe they were fighting for France.
Why is the French so loathful of English?
Previous page Pages: 1 2
"Napoleon was the first general to effectively utilize nationalism. Before him, armies were made up of serfs who just happened to live and work on the land of one of the warring factions. Part of the reason Napoleon was so successful (aside from being an incredible general) was the fact that he was able to get his armies to believe they were fighting for France."
Your information is essentially nonsense.
Professional armies existed well before Napoleon.
The large-scale armies of Napoleon's day were in fact the evolution of the "levée en masse" - a technique from the French revolution to raise a large army quickly by conscripting all able-bodied "citoyens."
But yes, Napoleon was indeed successful because he was an excellent general.
Your information is essentially nonsense.
Professional armies existed well before Napoleon.
The large-scale armies of Napoleon's day were in fact the evolution of the "levée en masse" - a technique from the French revolution to raise a large army quickly by conscripting all able-bodied "citoyens."
But yes, Napoleon was indeed successful because he was an excellent general.
Professional armies existed, yes, but armies were typically made up of peasants whose lords were told by the king to make their men go and fight. Essentially, it was not unheard of for captains and generals to say "go into that forest and fight the enemy" and their men would just desert. Napoleon utilized nationalism not only to get the peasant class to fight, but to get them to keep fighting.
Try reading "War in Human History" by Azar Gat, it's considered the preeminent work of the history of warfare by international relations scholars.
Try reading "War in Human History" by Azar Gat, it's considered the preeminent work of the history of warfare by international relations scholars.
So what exactly have the Romans done for us?
Didn't they have full time paid soldiers a more than a millenia before Napoleon was promoting little man syndrome across Europe?
I'm not too well educated in European history, but I think Napoleon's forays coincided with the emergence of nation states as they exist today.
Didn't they have full time paid soldiers a more than a millenia before Napoleon was promoting little man syndrome across Europe?
I'm not too well educated in European history, but I think Napoleon's forays coincided with the emergence of nation states as they exist today.
It's to do with national identity! Also French hasn't become a world language like English and Spanish. It is widespread, but not as much as the previously mentioned two.Therefore the French are very protective of their language and don't like English and Spanish words creeping in! Saying that, plenty of French people speak English, it puts shame on a lot of English speaking countries and their one language speaking populations!
Previous page Pages: 1 2