"Nap march from the coast to Paris." Topic

Did you think that mostly of the French population were waiting the return of their Empereur?.

Or it was only a matter of Army guys?.

What had made so bad the Bourbons to suffered so kind of humillation?.

Would apreciate your oppinions.

Amicalement
Armand

I suspect most of the French population thought "Oh , here we go again". The military and the city dwelling petit bourgeois may have had a different agenda, but your average paysan – and they were the majority, France was still an agrarian society – probably couldn't have cared less which absolute ruler was taxing him.

I would second Connard's suggestion. Different classes of society would probably react differently. Many were probably tired of constant warfare, others still enamored with the concept of "la gloire". Some would have been no more than opportunists seeking self enrichment.

Well, reluctant as I am to disagree with Connard, I think there was something of a popular swell for Nappy, if for no other reason than Fat Louis and his henchmen were such terrible rulers – from what I understand, they acted as if the Revolution never happened, while Nappy's government, for all it's faults, was probably better for the average French working stiff than pretty much all the previous aristos put together

The best sources by which to answer this are the contemporary documents.

From these it seems that most of the army was in favour of Napoleon's coup, while the majority of the civilian population (at all levels) were at best ambivalent. Louis XVIII may have been a poor king but he did not try to undo all that the peasants and middle classes had gained during the revolution. Also,and this comes across from many letters and documents of the time, people were prepared to put up with him because he was not wasting the lives of the male population of France.

I strongly suspect that the bulk of the population would have swung firmly behind Napoleon if he could have brought peace, which was never going to happen.

Dear Armand
The French economy was in tatters. Not helped by Louis XVIII heavy handedness and the aristocracy taking back their lands. The army was almost disbanded. There were a huge number of un-employed soldiers who were practically starving.

In modern times, many in Russia have looked back at the good times under Stalin. I wonder if it was any different for the return of Napoleon.

The French Army was a worry as the officers had changed sides now three times in 9 months. Victory was the only thing that would keep the army and the politicians together. Napoleon did miracles in creating an army from nothing. He took his chances and lost through the perseverance of the allied soldier on the ground mostly rather than the generals.

Quatra Bras was a very important battle fought because the Netherlands commander there decided to fight it. Read Mike Robinson's wonderful account of the battle. Ligny was a slogging match where the Prussians were overwhelmed but not destroyed as Napoleon hoped. Waterloo was a waiting game where the weather played a significant part and poorly handled by Napoleon. Probably he was trying to rush. There was not strategic maneuvre just a frontal assault. The diversion to Hougomont sucked in more French troops than allied.

It is interesting to read of the events of 1830, 1848 and 1870 with the parallels. Alas France did not have a Napoleon to take charge as in 1799. Maybe Europe was fortunate.

Stephen