Tango01 | 11 Jan 2023 8:54 p.m. PST |
"Britain's strategy in the struggle against Napoleon was based on providing subsidies to his opponents and harrying France on the seas and in its colonies, but without committing British ground forces to fighting on the Continent. The only exception was in the Iberian Peninsula. Napoleon's decision to include the peninsula in his dynastic plans was a necessary consequence of the Continental System: Napoleon could not allow the vast gap in his blockade represented by an independent Spain and Portugal, free to trade with Britain, to go unplugged. Spain had until 1807 avoided Napoleon's control. Though declining in stature as a world power, the Spanish remained proud. They remembered their great tradition of explorers, colonies, and visionary rulers like Ferdinand and Isabella. They had a rich culture and history, and the Napoleonic era was the time of several great Spanish painters such as Goya. When Napoleon manipulated the Bourbon king of Spain off the throne and installed his brother Joseph as king, an anti-French guerilla war broke out. Britain, seizing the opportunity to harm France, sent an army under the Duke of Wellington to aid the guerillas, called peninsulars. On 30 November General Junot's forces occupied Lisbon, Portugal joined Spain in the draining and bloody Peninsular War, Napoleon's 'Spanish Ulcer' which was to last until June 1813. The war became more grave for France in May 1808 when the people of Madrid rebelled against Joachim Murat's French occupation forces. When Napoleon briefly took personal command in Spain between November 1808 and January 1809, he left the country convinced that it was pacified. But further victories and the extension of his power in Germany and Italy had to be paid for by an ever increasing tax burden and conscription imposed on the peoples of the empire. Almost everywhere, this burden came to outweigh the liberating effects of Napoleonic rule embodied in the law codes and the abolition of outdated social regulations and constraints…" Main page
link
Armand
|
4th Cuirassier | 12 Jan 2023 3:55 a.m. PST |
Britain's strategy in the struggle against Napoleon was based on providing subsidies to his opponents and harrying France on the seas and in its colonies, but without committing British ground forces to fighting on the Continent. The only exception was in the Iberian Peninsula. Well, that's complete bull5hit straight off the bat. |
Murvihill | 12 Jan 2023 6:09 a.m. PST |
4th, why don't you provide a list of the times the UK sent troops to the continent outside the peninsula? First things that come to mind to me is Naples. I'm not particularly an Anglophile but give credit where it is due… |
4th Cuirassier | 12 Jan 2023 6:26 a.m. PST |
According to Roger Knight in Britain Against Napoleon Britain undertook in excess of fifty amphibious operations in the era. The Wikipedia article is quite a good start: link The quoted claim that "the only exception" was the Peninsula is total rubbish. |
Brechtel198 | 12 Jan 2023 9:10 a.m. PST |
But how many were successful? The British were defeated in Flanders in 1793-1795; they failed in Holland in 1799. They failed again in Spain and Italy in 1800, as well as in Naples and Hanover in 1805. They failed twice in Argentina in 1806-1807 as well as at the Dardanelles and Egypt. Spain and Sweden in 1808 were failures as well as in Holland in 1809. They were successful in Egypt in 1801 and in Portugal in 1808, but they allowed the French to go home. With the exception of Wellington, the British could win battles but lost campaigns, as against Suchet in eastern Spain and at Maida in 1806. Even Wellington fell into that category after Talavera in 1809 and at Burgos in 1812. Against the United States in 1814 the British lost at Chippawa, had a hard-fought draw at Lundy's Lane, and failed again against Fort Erie, at Plattsburg, Baltimore and New Orleans. |
4th Cuirassier | 12 Jan 2023 10:09 a.m. PST |
Successful is not the question. The quoted claim was that Britain's strategy was based on not "committing British ground forces to fighting on the Continent. The only exception was in the Iberian Peninsula". The claim is patently factually inaccurate: British forces were committed to Europe repeatedly, not just in the Peninsula. |
Brechtel198 | 12 Jan 2023 10:17 a.m. PST |
But never in the numbers that meant that they could stand on their own-not in the Peninsula and not at Waterloo. In the United States the US Army was numerically small, so the British there at least had parity in numbers and were superior in skill until the 1814 campaigns. Success is always the question, whether it is put or not. |
von Winterfeldt | 12 Jan 2023 12:13 p.m. PST |
strange how misinformation and propaganda is so florishing, the Brits did commit not only money but a huge amount of military, the navy is usually ignored – this comittment along is huge. Not only Naples, what is about Walcheren? A good book to start to read is Andrew Bamford Sickness, Suffering, and the Sword: The British Regiment on Campaign, 1808-1815 (Campaigns and Commanders, please read it and I found it highly informative |
von Winterfeldt | 12 Jan 2023 12:24 p.m. PST |
Also by the same author Bold and Ambitious Enterprise: The British Army in the Low Countries, 1813 – 1814 please educate yourself and read it. |
von Winterfeldt | 12 Jan 2023 12:26 p.m. PST |
also from G. Glover The Forgotten War Against Napoleon: Conflict in the Mediterranean, 1793–1815 I enjoyed reading it, very reasonable on kindle |
Lapsang | 12 Jan 2023 12:49 p.m. PST |
"…but without committing British Ground Forces to fighting on the Continent. The only exception was in where the British committed Ground Forces to fighting on the Continent." |
4th Cuirassier | 12 Jan 2023 2:36 p.m. PST |
Lol @ Lapsang The British actually captured the port of Flushing in 1809. It wasn't holdable but that wasn't the idea, which was to burn any ships the Corsican bandit was building in Antwerp. Walcheren fever rather than the French stopped it. |
Bill N | 12 Jan 2023 2:41 p.m. PST |
The British Army's contribution to the Napoleonic Wars save for Spain and the Waterloo campaign seems to get overlooked. Not arguing whether this is fair or not, but off the top of my head: Naples 1805 Hanover 1805 Naples 1806 Sicily 1806-? Sweden 1808 Iberia 1808-14 Ionian Islands 1809-14 Walcheren 1809 Netherlands 1813-14 Waterloo 1815 |
4th Cuirassier | 12 Jan 2023 5:05 p.m. PST |
Napoleon captured Moscow in 1812 in exactly the same way that Britain captured Flushing in 1809. |
Murvihill | 13 Jan 2023 7:42 a.m. PST |
The British goal in all their amphibious operations were not permanently claiming land but forcing the French to defend the entire shore of the empire. I expect they were pretty successful in that. |
Brechtel198 | 13 Jan 2023 8:04 a.m. PST |
…I expect they were pretty successful in that. Perhaps you could explain that comment more fully? |
Cerdic | 14 Jan 2023 12:16 a.m. PST |
I think it was Admiral Fisher who said "the British Army is just a missile launched by the Royal Navy…" |
Brechtel198 | 14 Jan 2023 5:04 a.m. PST |
Napoleon captured Moscow in 1812 in exactly the same way that Britain captured Flushing in 1809. Which major battle was fought by the British, with the exception of disease, in order to take Flushing? |
Brechtel198 | 14 Jan 2023 5:12 a.m. PST |
Henry Lloyd maintained that England should disband its army and maintain a substantial force of 'twenty or thirty thousand marines' and then having a 'fleet having on board twelve or fifteen thousand marines…England could seize the enemies' colonies and keep them…in constant anxiety in every part of the world.' Napoleon later wondered why the English didn't do that. Lloyd is one of history's fascinating and mysterious officers and military theorists. His writings and career deserve more study. |
Brechtel198 | 14 Jan 2023 5:16 a.m. PST |
Britain's strategy in the struggle against Napoleon was based on providing subsidies to his opponents and harrying France on the seas and in its colonies, but without committing British ground forces to fighting on the Continent. The only exception was in the Iberian Peninsula. It is largely correct. England was the allies' paymaster and without those subsidies Austria, Prussia, and Russia could not have taken the field in 1813-1814 as all three governments were broke. Great Britain fielded many operations on the periphery of Europe and the Peninsula was the one long-term deployment that she undertook. And she still had to pay the significant Portuguese contingent as well as arm, uniform, and equip them. Without the Portuguese Wellington would have failed. And then there were the German contingents… And even then, Spain and Portugal were secondary theaters as the main 'event' was in central Europe and France in 1813-1814. |
Lilian | 14 Jan 2023 5:49 a.m. PST |
So that is the so-called impressive participation of the British Army on the continent implying that the vision given the Peninsular War as more an exception than anything else would be a definitive nonsense Toulon 1793…with Spanish and Italian States Armies more larger than the 2000 British only Flanders 1793-1795…with Hanoverian, Dutch, Hessian, Austrian and Prussian Armies larger than the British Holland 1799..with Russian Army (having send around Western Europe 82 000 men this first year of participation, number that Britain was totally unable to sent against France on the continet the six previous years as well as the following decade) Hanover, Naples, Sicily, Walcheren with small expeditionary forces when major Continental Powers were ables to mobilize 100, 200, half million of men against France and came the so-called Mother-of-all-Battles the "Peninsular War" the so-called prostate appendicitis Vietnam Afghanistan inflicted to Napoleon, with around 30 to 40 000 men waou, we are impressed by the level of participation of the British Army, all that for that…nothing new under the sun or more exactly the London fog and that all the napoleonic connoisseurs already knew before that, except the British ones |
Tango01 | 14 Jan 2023 3:24 p.m. PST |
|
Brechtel198 | 15 Jan 2023 10:48 a.m. PST |
Another book that might be helpful is War in the Mediterranean by Piers Macksey. |
Brechtel198 | 15 Jan 2023 10:49 a.m. PST |
The British Army's contribution to the Napoleonic Wars save for Spain and the Waterloo campaign seems to get overlooked. Not arguing whether this is fair or not, but off the top of my head: Naples 1805 Hanover 1805 Naples 1806 Sicily 1806-? Sweden 1808 Iberia 1808-14 Ionian Islands 1809-14 Walcheren 1809 Netherlands 1813-14 Waterloo 1815 How many were successes? |