Napoleon's Wars: An International History

This is a massive narrative that examines the political history of the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic eras. It deals primarily with the political relationships between the European powers during this epoch. However, the excellent political analysis is colored by Esdaile’s vehement antagonism toward Napoleon Bonaparte, and this strange resentment is a major (and sometimes distracting) emphasis in much of the book.Esdaile has two broad themes that he repeatedly emphasizes. The first is Napoleon’s character. He paints Napoleon as an untrustworthy opportunist who holds personal responsibility for perpetuating the conflict in Europe. Esdaile’s evidence is often convincing, with highly relevant quotations from Napoleon and those close to him clearly supporting his premise. However, Esdaile tarnishes his persuasive analysis with what can only be described as rants. He uses emotional language and “takes sides” in his history, both of which are uncharacteristic of most professional historians. He even seems strangely “conspiracy theory-ish” at times. For example, he says in the preface: “Through the memoirs that he encouraged his companions to write, he reached out beyond the confines of grave and exile, and established a version of events which historians have found impossible to ignore.” He seems genuinely concerned about the support and fascination that Napoleon has inspired over the centuries. His attacks on Napoleon are often visceral and occasionally distasteful. Included here are theories about Napoleon's sexual life and its relation to his warlike nature, and a really strange comment about a possible physical attraction to Tsar Alexander. Though the book generally becomes more tolerable in this regard as it moves forward, Esdaile never lets go of his personal bias against Napoleon. Indeed, the very last sentence of the book reminds us that Napoleon’s primary contribution to European history is as its “bogeyman.”The second major theme of the work (though inherently linked with the first) is handled in much better fashion. This is the focus on the international political relationships between the European powers and their leaders. Esdaile’s argument is that the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars were dominated by the same foreign policy objectives that had concerned the various European states for much of the previous century. He is adamant in illustrating that France never faced a Europe united in common cause until the very end of Napoleon’s reign. The governments of Britain, Russia, Prussia, and Austria (France’s chief rivals) all had disparate and often conflicting foreign policy objectives emanating from decades of competition. Each coalition against France prior to 1813 was characterized more heavily by these traditional territorial/dynastic concerns than by distinct ideological opposition to the French Revolution or Napoleon’s aspirations. Esdaile brilliantly analyzes this complicated and amorphous political landscape, providing excellent insight on the many competing interests among the European nations, and also within them. As can be guessed, he lays the blame on Napoleon and his unwillingness to compromise for providing the impetus for the major European powers to set aside traditional interests and unite in a formidable (and at the time historically-unique) alliance against France. As mentioned, his evidence and analysis is generally convincing.As far as the writing and the style of the book, Esdaile's chapters are long with massive amounts of information and analysis. His narrative is relatively smooth, but the numerous tangents make it hard sometimes to discern the primary focus. He inserts major and complex topical themes directly into his chronological chapters, such as a discussion on the British “air of superiority” in chapter 4 and his rapid segue from Napoleon’s infamous (and disastrous) retreat from Russia to the American-British War of 1812 in chapter 10. Nevertheless, his writing is very engaging and fun to read. He commands detail and nuance very well and makes highly complex politics easy to digest. The book does not concentrate on the battles but rather the political history: he handles most of the major military events in a paragraph or less. Those looking for more detail on military exploits will likely need to look elsewhere. Where Esdaile shines is in analyzing the myriad political leaders and their interests, though I would highly recommend someone not familiar with the period to start with a more basic summary first, as this book assumes at least a general knowledge of the period. As may be predictable from the rest of this review, the book has a generally Anglo-centric approach and is especially critical of French foreign policy, but I should point out that Esdaile occasionally chastises the British. He does not shy away from criticizing Napoleon’s opponents—he just does it with far less frequency.Overall, I really enjoyed this book. It took some time to get used to Esdaile’s belligerent approach and it genuinely made me think twice about continuing. But after several chapters the rants receded to the background, and I was able to learn a great deal about this era and its interesting characters, including Napoleon.

This book by Charles Esdaile deserves better treatment than what it gets from its reviewers on Amazon.This book is about the international scene at the time of Napoleon and it does it quite well. If you want to learn all about what was going on in the world at the time of Napoleon's reign, this book is an excellent read. The book is about what each nation was doing and what each king, his advisors, or government were thinking in relation to the reshaping of Europe as the result of the French Revolution and Napoleon's military victories. Esdaile's book is about the complex political realities that faced all nations Britain, Austria, Russia, Prussia, Ottoman Empire (etc.), to the most minute actors such as the Kingdom of Naples during the Third Coalition. Not to be forgotten, Spain plays an important role in the narrative and the book goes so far as to cover events in the Americas (Spanish America, The U.S., French Louisiana) and how they impacted affairs in Europe.Esdaile does place a lot of the blame on Napoleon's personality as the cause for war and this may raise a slight red flag of bias (because in some cases one could argue Napoleon had no choice owing to the actions of the British and other nations). Still, Esdaile makes a good case and does show how other authors have explained the causes of. Allegations of a perceived bias denies the fact that Esdaile may be making a really good argument which is his right to do and which makes it unique.The book does not claim to be a book on military history. The battles are mostly covered in short detail. So, if you are looking for military history look elsewhere. As stated before, this is a book on international history in relation to Napoleon's wars.I would like to note that Esdaile writes like a professional. His historical prose and erudition flows. This makes for a pleasurable read which is not tiresome. I did see someone criticize the book here on Amazon for poor proofing. I have read it cover to cover and only found six grammatical errors such as the use of a "had had" which was simply unnecessary, a "the that," or the spelling of nevertheless as "never the less." The errors did not detract from my reading of the book but probably should have been picked up by the editors.My only other comment would be that the chapters can be long. If I were the editor and this book was to be printed again, I would suggest to the author that he put in subheadings to break the chapters up, so that a reader has a place to pause. It would also help in certain areas where the author transitions from one topic to another.Despite these two minor points, the book is a great read if you want to learn about the world at the time of the Napoleonic Wars.

The book was in excellent shape, and the approach the author takes is really interesting. By presenting more than just the military aspects, we get a more complete picture of the social, political and economic context.

This book concentrates not so much on the battles and the battle strategies but reveals the diplomatic, and often also the personal, relationship between the warring states and the statesmen. It reveals the puppet masters who played with the lives of millions as if they were merely pawns in a game of chess. Nopoleaon's Wars makes the Napoleonic era (almost) unbiased understandable to the student of that period in European history. I sorely recommend it.

This history of the Napoleonic Wars is different from the usual fare, since it focuses heavily on the politics and strategy of the contending parties rather than the details of the operations or the battles. Economic factors are explained, although not in great detail. This is all a very useful shift in viewpoint, since so much of the literature concentrates on the details of those battles, or the personality of Napoleon, or the character of the armies and navies involved. Readers expecting concentration any of those things might well be disappointed although the character of the Emperor can hardly be ignored when considering the strategy and politics of the period, and is thus given due attention.The author is a well-known critic of Napoleon but given that, I thought that his treatement of the Emperor relatively fair and all of his criticisms substantiated. However, given the layers of hagiographical literature built up around the Emperor, there are inevitably going to be some facts and interpretations that modern fans of the Emperor will find intensely irritating.The central strategic fact of the Napoleonic Wars - that Napoleon's France could only be defeated by the concerted efforts of all of the other major powers - is given due prominence, and most importantly, why those concerted efforts did not happen until late on. This explains the emphasis on areas that are neglected in other histories, particularly the relations of Russia with the Ottoman Empire and Persia, since the attention of Russia could be, and often was, diverted by problems and opportunities in the Balkans and Caucasus: Esdaile makes the provocative point that the most important conflict of the period was that between Russia and Persia, since Russian success ensured that Central Asia would eventually come under Russian, not Persian domination. Other neglected areas - Britain's relations with Sweden and Sicily for example - are also covered in some detail.The writing is quite dense, although thankfully jargon-free. However, although the book is full of interest for those interested in political strategy and international affairs, it doesn't have the liveliness that some of the accounts of the campaigns and battles have. This book is therefore recommended to the more serious student of the period and/or for those more interested in the political side of the conflict. It is a very useful resource for those who need more context for the character of the Emperor or the warfare of the period, but not those readers whose interests are more limited in focus.

Charles Esdaile is an authoritative author on the era of Napoleon. He is Professor of History at the University of Liverpool, and has published several books, including works on the Napoleonic Wars, the Prussian Army at Waterloo, Women in the Peninsular War, The Duke of Wellington, and the Peninsular War. This book was first published in 2007, so remains a relevant source on Napoleon and the Napoleonic Wars, a subject which can be subject to much scholarly revision with new discoveries and interpretations of material.The author has taken the period from 1803, when war broke out again after the Peace of Lunéville and of Amiens, and when the so-called Napoleonic Wars themselves started after the end of the Revolutionary Wars, through to 1815, with the final defeat and abdication of Napoleon after the Battle of Waterloo.Moving largely chronologically (though sometimes diverting into thematic subsections of necessity, to explain background and relevant material to the particular battle or war), the book covers, firstly the background to and origins of the Napoleonic Wars, then the action from Brumaire in 1799 to Amiens in 1802, and then the outbreak of war and the Third Coalition, through the various theatres of war across Europe to Waterloo in 1815. The action moves widely across the whole canvas of Europe, including Britain, and also includes some discussion about related areas that impacted on the Napoleonic War, such as the Spanish holdings in America, and the new United States of America itself.The wars that took place over the main 12 year period were horrific in their scope, their death and destruction, and the social, cultural and economic impacts that they had on millions of people over so many years. Yet the Napoleonic Wars remained very much the result of the vision and ambition of that one man, Napoleon. It was not until the other European powers eventually and temporarily overcame their own prejudices and ambitions that they were able to form a coalition strong enough to finally overpower Napoleon’s own French and allied forces. It was only in 1815 that allied unity and compromise ovecame hegemony, and for just long enough that compromise proved strong enough to stop Napoleon once and for all.A great read, this book is a must for anyone seeking to better understand Napoleon, and the impact that the Napoleonic Wars had on Europe; not just the Europe of Napoleon, Metternich, Alexander I, Wellington and all those well-known names, but the Europe of the small people (whose voices are often heard in the book through excerpts of letters and journals), and on the Europe of the future that had to live with the consequences of the settlements made at the Congress of Vienna in 1815.

Brilliant