"Napoleon Bonaparte's Peak of Military Success: Ulm" Topic

…and Austerlitz.

"Napoleon Bonaparte is considered one of the greatest military minds in the history of warfare. When Napoleon Bonaparte launched into a long series of wars known as the "Napoleonic Wars" with Europe in 1799, he was determined to extend the territorial boundaries of France and its revolutionary borders. Historians view the "Napoleonic Wars" as a continuation of the wars sparked by the French Revolution of 1789, which had significant impact on all of Europe and revolutionized European armies. With the modern creation of mass conscription, the French Empire quickly grew, as Napoleon sought to create a universal hegemony over all of Europe. So what was the peak of Napoleon's military success during the Napoleonic Wars? Napoleon's road to success was charted by the supreme triumphs of Ulm and Austerlitz in 1805. These battles represented a strategic turning point for the French, and demonstrated the supreme military might of the French Empire and strategic genius of Napoleon Bonaparte. These two battles represent the climax of Napoleon's success, and signify his continued efforts to expand his empire further into Europe

After failing to carry out his planned invasion of England in 1803-1805, Napoleon led his Grand Armee from the English Channel to the Rhine in order to deal with new threats there.1 The Prussians were mobilizing quickly, the Russians were only a few weeks away from the central European theater, and Austrian forces were within striking distance of Napoleon and his Grand Armee. Napoleon knew he needed to defeat the Austrian force if he was to stand a chance against the entire coalition. An Austrian victory could delay the French until the Russians arrived, prolonging the war and increasing the likelihood that Prussia would enter the war. However, a French…"
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

Not really.
Under the blue skies title, amasses a series of single opinion one liners, supported it seems by citations from a single source: Alistair Horne, Napoleon: Master of Europe 1805-1807.

And a balance sheet of 'consulted' works that frankly I can't believe. Strange that identical text occurs in cited web sites, equally poor, so who copied whom?

Ulm, actually wasn't a 'battle', but then you'd have to research history to know that.
-1/ 10 being charitable :-0
~d

First problem: The Napoleonic Wars began when Great Britain broke the Treaty of Amiens. Napoleon did not 'launch into a long series of wars in 1799. As the new head of state in November 1799 he inherited warfare being waged as a result of the French Revolution, which he successfully ended with the Treaty of Amiens.

Second problem: There was no 'battle of Ulm.'

Third problem: The Grande Armee was on the Channel Coast preparing for an invasion of England when the Austrians invaded Bavaria, France's ally, and Napoleon had to turn east with the Grande Armee, a movement that resulted in the Austrian capitulation at Ulm and would lead to Austerlitz.

As great as the victories of 1805 were, I believe the Jena campaign was greater. In three weeks of marching and fighting, the French destroyed the Prussian army and state. And that campaign witnessed the greatest and most effective pursuit of the period.

He had me at 'calvary.'

Aren't we being a little harsh here on both Armand and the website link? After all, some fighting and artillery fire did take place at Ulm before the Austrians finally surrendered? Could this not suggest that, if not actually considered as a fully fledged battle, perhaps it could be seen and termed as a siege, of a sort?

'Ney immediately stormed the outer redoubts of the defenses of Ulm, occupying advance positions from which he could begin a bombardment of the city itself.' (1805: Austerlitz by Robert Goetz, p55)

'Napoleon now opened a bombardment of the defenceless place, and sent the staff officer Segur to demand Mack's surrender.' (Austerlitz 1805 by Christopher Duffy, page 50)

'On 15th October the French completed the encirclement of Ulm and began an artillery bombardment of the walls.' (Austerlitz 1805 by Ian Castle, page 31)

By the way, I am not stating myself that the capitulation at Ulm was an actual battle. I am just throwing out a few thoughts.

There was fighting around Ulm, such as Dupont's fight at Haslach. But the idea of a 'battle of Ulm' is a misnomer.

Regarding Armand, he always does good work and is greatly appreciated. Some of his findings have sparked some of the best discussions on the forum.

A little about the article's author:

link

Agree with Kevin, there was no "battle of Ulm", rather the various engagements at Haslach-Jungingen, Gunzburg, Elchingen,Wertingen, etc are referred to as the "Campaign of Ulm".

And I too would argue that the absolute military zenith was reached in 1806 against the Prussians at Jena-Auerstadt, not at Austerlitz in 1805. One could claim that Austerlitz was possibly Napoleon's greatest victory personally but I think the peak of the Grande Armee was 1806.