0115 966 7955 Today's Opening Times 10:00 - 20:00 (GMT)
Place an Order
Instant price

Struggling with your work?

Get it right the first time & learn smarter today

Place an Order
Banner ad for Viper plagiarism checker

Analyse The Strengths And Weaknesses Of Napoleon Bonaparte History Essay

Disclaimer: This work has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional academic writers. You can view samples of our professional work here.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of UK Essays.

Published: Mon, 5 Dec 2016

The mere mention of Napoleon Bonaparte stirs emotions. He was indeed one of the ‘greatest military minds’ in the history of warfare. The events of his life have fuelled the imaginations of historians, literary figures, commanding officers, film makers and students alike. Both the endless praise and profound criticisms heaped on such an iconic figure have contributed significantly to the expansion of the Napoleonic legend.

Napoleon possessed an unbelievable range of intellectual ability. His powers of concentration were enormous as was his memory for details and facts. This insatiable thirst and ability to absorb knowledge gave him the ability to work for long periods continually. Standing at only 5’2″ he was a brilliant military strategist who was both admired and feared. His genius lay in the fact that he did not revolutionize the warfare itself but excelled at refining the existing art. Drastic changes in reforms were not proposed; rather he employed new ways to make things work. Taking interest in the smallest measures under his command he used his mental abilities to think out military problems days or even months in advance, a trait that proved invaluable on battle fields where he perplexed the opposing armies with his military strategies’. He always thought of different ways to approach a job or task at hand. Fusion of battle with maneuver was his greatest contribution to the art of war. Insisting on speed and mobility; the basic features of his campaign, he introduced a system of army corps capable of holding off superior forces until help arrived. He streamlined the system to achieve a higher degree of proficiency allowing for greater mobility and thus greater advantage over his opponents.

One thing that Napoleon was conscious of was how to portray himself and his achievements, to his personal glory. He had a great ability in propaganda, the art of getting the masses and elite to understand and support what he wanted them to. He skillfully used self promotion such as proclamations, bulletins and letters to government all written with his interests in mind. His campaigns in the eyes of the public became crusades of good against evil. He even went as far as commissioning artists and offering prizes for portraits and sculptures celebrating key moments in his career. Truly a master manipulator, he strategically projected an idealized image of himself that he carefully fashioned to suit the purposes of his ambition.

As a leader, Napoleon first won the trust and loyalty of his men; from the lowest soldier to the highest ranking general and aristocrats. Indeed his greatest strength, he accomplished this by promising them victory and glory. A charismatic speaker with irresistible charm he was able to influence not only those that he led but also those that he did not lead. A great motivator of the people he understood that he had to fill the needs of the people first, in order to excite them enough about the art of war. This was the only way that they would have the passion to complete succeeding missions.

An inspiration to both Frenchmen and foreigners, Napoleon had the unique ability to persuade people to believe in his cause and adapt to his way of thinking. Thus he won a significant amount of credibility and favour by simply involving himself in warfare, particularly on the battlefield alongside his men. He never lost sight of his responsibility to get the job done. No job was beneath him and he took on tasks that could have easily been delegated to others. In the eyes of those under his command this was extremely commendable. He made his soldiers feel as though he was one of them and not above them and here in lay the indeterminable strength of his army. Napoleons army not only fought for France, they were entirely devoted to their commanding general making it impossible to stop them. He understood that he had to make others confident in his ability to succeed this was the only way they would believe that they held the same ability.

Edgar Allen Pope said that “To vilify a great man is the readiest way in which a little man can himself attain greatness.” Napoleon was greatly aware of the impact of morale on modern warfare. He believed in the maxim, “Morale is to the physical as three is to one.” and that, “Moral force rather than numbers, decides victories.” Thus he derived a system of awards and preferment, appealing to the soldiers “soul in order to electrify the man.” Napoleon understood that showing gratitude was a way to gain the favor of the people. He paid soldiers using the gold and silver he attained from battles and created the Legion of Honor to reward the accomplishments of his soldiers. Often he honoured the best or bravest soldier by removing his own medals or merits off his coat and placing them on the soldier’s in question which ‘spread like wildfire’ and inspired them all. He promoted those who performed well regardless of their social background. Hence, he inevitably linked the fortunes of his officers to his own continual success and maintenance of power. Letting his soldiers know from time to time how much they meant to the organization and how much he valued their effort was a sure way to keep the respect and admiration of the people. This ensured their total devotion and loyalty.

Towards the end of his empire however, Napoleons weaknesses became more evident. His once iron will turned to stubbornness as he became obsessed with warfare and territorial acquisition. This insatiable lust for power caused ceaseless demands on the resources of France. Troops were increased, so much so, that they became cumbersome to maneuver and more static. The scale of warfare increased and the key factor became firepower through the increasing scale of men and in particular artillery. The end result was that the “one time God of battles was overthrown by the dynamics of warfare that he had unleashed but failed to comprehend” He abandoned the principle of concentration and destruction of armies. Underestimating his enemies, he set the path for his downfall. After being exiled to Elba he suffered a loss of confidence and a deterioration of his physical health. This lack of confidence slowly trickled down to the soldiers and resulted in defeat.

Some may argue that his main weakness lay in the fact that he did not know when to quit. His megalomaniac personality would not allow him to adapt to the changing shape of war. As he became more powerful there was a growing distrust of those around him. He began to believe in things which had no reality. Always there were spies listening to the conversations of people in Paris. Thus he did not empower the people around him to do more because they were constantly looking over their shoulders. He pushed hard working men to pursue too much too soon without doubting or allowing those around him to question enough the merits of certain decisions. Having no tolerance for liberty he attempted to silence the speech of those around him. In doing so he limited the feedback he got about his leadership skills and how well he was doing his job; stunting his ability for growth and improvement. His belief in his own destiny that he was set apart from ordinary men warped his judgment and his incredibly inflated ego and controlling and overbearing nature insisted on controlling and influencing all aspects of legislative agenda with a tight grip. He needed to be involved in the development and execution of the plan, failing to delegate tasks, and empower both his staff and subordinates. This caused the work of the staff to be uncoordinated many times and low situational awareness became a popular characteristic throughout the army. A failure as a political leader he simply could not rule on a long term basis. He set up new administrations and imposed constitutions to fit them. The result was that none lasted for more than a few years. Control of the empire was unstable and uncontrollable because of his level of detail in providing advice and instructions. He made strategic failures of decisions to invade Spain and Russia and he angered the people he conquered with his tyranny. In later campaigns the fighting was seldom well managed when Napoleon did not direct it in person. He insisted on micro-management of the army and put too much trust in his lieutenants many of whom were not up to the task of individual command when out of their master’s gaze which proved extremely detrimental.

Napoleon, the passage of time has not dimmed the power of his name. A century and a half after his death, Napoleon remains the greatest military genius of the modern world. In the immortal words of Napoleon, “Victory belongs to the most persevering. The truest wisdom is a resolute determination.” This was the attitude of Napoleon Bonaparte, a revolutionist, a brilliant military strategist and a fearless soldier. Though many of his critics would describe him as a tyrant, a dictator -a ruthless, manipulative, driven man; to others “He simply embodied the ambitions of thirty million Frenchmen.” [1] .

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Request Removal

If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have the essay published on the UK Essays website then please click on the link below to request removal:

More from UK Essays