All Napoleon's battles in 60 seconds
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 фев 2025
- Take a tour of all Napoleon's battlegrounds in 60 seconds!
This was just a quick guide, but for lots more Napoleon, including feature-length documentaries on his major battles and campaigns, visit our channel @EpichistoryTv.
#Shorts #History #Napoleon #NapoleonicWars #France #EpicHistoryTV #MilitaryHistory
Incredible that even on the backfoot, he continued to win the majority of his battles. You know he was a baller when he had the coalition forces declare war on him alone rather than France.
Bro was the baddest of all bad bois
Minipili!!!
thats just because they didnt even want to recognise that he was ruling over france
That's what always impressed me. Especially during his 2nd to last ditch effort to defend France after Leipzig but before Elba. I think it's called the Champagne campaign, he wins the battles but lost the war. The allied generals realized the best way to fight Napoleon was to not fight him at all, concentrate on his generals who weren't as competent.
I mean look at the Trachenberg plan, even when Napoleon was on the backfoot, all of Europe's best generals were scared and avoided him
Bro soloed Europe 5 times in a row.
Insanity
Not 100% accurate but true to the most part
Literally why you should always roll your eyes when people say France always surrenders. Napoleon slapped Europe around for more than two decades.
@@Rildar not 100% true
@@ciaranReal My statement was a general statement, and is true.
@@RildarThe average person's memory only stretches back to the latest familiar thing, so unfortunately 1000 years of French military might is summed up as 'Surrendered to Hitler'
Mans faced against 90% of Europe and won 5 out of 7 coalitions…arguably the greatest military general of all time
You do not understand history,
Freemasonry put him in power. once used, it became useless, freemasonry had snatched power throughout Europep!!! History books never mention that!!
There you have it. They sent him to Russia
depends , Khaled ibn al walid was leader of an arabian army who was the most inferior in archery technology and were wearing basic chain armor and defeated armies of full plated soldiers and cataphracts and composite bow archers and horse archers and siege weapons of both sassanids and Romans , hell he even defeated the muslims when he was still a pagan general. over 40 major battle s a hundred skirmishes with 0 defeat and 2 super powers turned to a husk by the ammount of armies he defeated . this make him like hannibal but more perfect since hannibal actually lost 2 battles.
napoleon in other hand is like ceasar and alexander . this mean they are already privileged with the most advanced army and lot of wealth they hardly have to care as much as Khaled or hannibal about food and logistics . napoleon especially had lot of privilege that allowed him to become an officer to begin with . it wasnt by merit but by liaisons and friends that he didnt end up a foot soldier
@@LauftFafacmon man. You had me until the end. You might want to research who Khaled’s grandfather was. As well as his maternal uncle. Or just his overall family in general. He was by far a “rags to riches” story.
Alexander never lost against any coalition
@@LauftFafaalso, you might want to research the state in which France was in when Napoleon came on the scene. No true functioning central government, massive debts, a ruined economy, and fighting a war on multiple fronts.
The emperor is no doubt a military genius, but it also showed us how one could keep wining battles but lose the war.
"My Eagles are once again victorious, but my star is setting nonetheless." That might be my favorite quote, or its up there at least, by Napoleon.
Sounds nice, but wrong. Napoleon simply lost too many battles 1812-1815.
Pyrhus showed that 2000 years before
Another example of that is the Hundred Years War where the English kept winning major battles but ended up being defeated and losing all of their progress
@@ralphx1564Probably the invasion of Russia affected his army horribly
His win % is high, man was able to win even at heavily outnumbered conditions, truly a great commander
Bro in most of his battle's this genius of a man was always outnumbered.
Actually he was brilliant because even with a smaller army, he mostly outnumbered his enemies with his speed and tactics
@@Ancz7concentration of force and detail
Messi the true greatest leader🔥🔥🗿💪🏿
Make your enemy think you are stationary when you are mobile, think you are mobile when you are stationary, master logistics the blood of the army, and defeat your enemies in detail. "The general who makes many calculations in his temple before battle will win" and "deception is the art of war" great ideas, true to all great generals
"My enemies are many, my equals are none."
*~ Le Petit Caporal 1769 - 1821*
TOTAL WAR
_In the land of olive trees…_
@@brunswickgaming1815they said Italy could never be conquered.
One of the coldest quote in my life 😮
Total war three kingdoms
This 60 second recap of Napoleon is better than the Napoleon movie.
the original Waterloo is a true masterpiece on his Majesty's regard.
@@overzone666 True, the uniforms used in the movie is also mostly accurate
You sadly right. I fall asleep after 1h when the start the "cuck arc".... a badly missed opportunity, could have shown the world.
100%, the "Napoleon movie" was a mockery of the man
le problème des films c'est que pour vraiment faire quelque chose de grandiose sur la vie de Napoléon, il faudrait faire une série avec l'équivalent d'un budget national pour non seulement parler de sa vie et de ses campagnes militaires, mais aussi pour faire quelques chose qui surpasse "Guerre et Paix" de Sergueï Bondartchouk (1967) en terme de batailles
That is one sweet Win/Loss Ratio.
Ragers say he cheated
@@polyperchon4511 The only unfair fight is the one you lose.
@@tonycj7860 i think about general Charles O'hara, a british general who, in USA surrending at yorktown to Georges Washington.. then he surrending in France at Toulon to Napoléon Bonaparte... what an unfair life for him x)
Well he lost the most important battles
@@MeatGoblin88Wagram, Austerlitz, Marengo, Rivoli, Jena, Friedland, etc were all decisive victories, he won the first fifth wars of coalition. So, no, he doesn't lost the most important battles, the two most important battles he lost were the last ones at Leipzig and Waterloo.
he won 42 battels and lost 8 in 22 years he is a legend
@Fatehali-yg3kyallah akbar
Nope, Napoléon IS the human that won the most battle in the human History. @Fatehali-yg3ky
@Fatehali-yg3ky bro your khalid fight who? Who? Nonody.
@Fatehali-yg3kyhe fought 30
Like that means anything...
Really says something about his skill that the best way to defeat Napoleon was to not fight him
Duke of wellington: hold my Ale 🍺
@@ShiningStar13987Yea but correct me if I'm wrong he wasn't even there
@@ShiningStar13987 bruh he need blucher from prussian to win the battle, if grouchy join the battle it’s obvious France will beat both of them 🫢🗿
His ego crushed when it came to The British.
@@ShiningStar13987, Don't forget Lord Nelson and The Battle of Trafalgar which this program neglects to mention.
Even when he is losing, he is winning. A force of nature indeed.
Yeah, even defeated the sparks of revolution are already done. The empires of old have to face it.
Even in his later days he still won most battles. Guy was an absolute legend
Whether you like him or not. He was a brilliant general and leader. How did he cope mentally is beyond me.
He did not cope. Dude was a megalomaniac and so full of himself even losses weren't affecting him. All but one, in 1814, where he tried to kill himself by ingesting a small poison vial he kept on him at all time. However the poison had since then expired and instead of killing him, it just made him sick
@@LET4M4RUhe spent years coping in conditions you couldn't last an hour in. Your comment is absurd
Give the guy who made this short idea and wrote the script a raise. Amazing!
Managed to fit everything summary in one reel
Gang ruhrig, und one omission!
(Did you knowvThe Field lion then made the entire economics system they used until very recently in europe?)
he is already getting paid, its his job to make videos like these.
Napoleon is my favorite character in history because of his genius. Dude had the entirety of europe declare war on him personally. To me, this proves he was the best general in history.
They didn’t declare war on him personally, but on what he represented: The ideals of the French Revolution: Liberty, Equality and Brotherhood. Ideals that didn’t fit with the feodal systems of the surrounding kingdoms.
@@Dwazedas they did on the last coalition,they declared war on Napoleon, not france itself
to be fair, we can't say "best" there are a lot of generals like chenghis khan, great alexander, timur etc. he's good but probably not "best"
Napoleon Bonparte is literally the living embodiment of an ideal drama novel brought to life. It has all the characteristics of a successful storyline: humble beginning and an initiation during a time of neverbefore seen chaos, first victory against absurd odds, brilliant campaigns in ancient lands with history dating to the beginning of civilization, deposes a corrupt government via coup and becames defacto dictator, becomes emperor and initiates the most successful policies that bring libety and a golden age for the populace, wins the most spectacular victories ever before seen against the strongest nations on the globe, takesoves the majority of the continent, marries a royal princess with whom he has a son to consolidate his dynasty, launches the largest campaign ever to invade a giant empire in the untamed of lands, losses after some of the bloodiest battles on the globe, is exiled but successsfully breakes away and retunres for one last fight, loses and is exiled definetely to one of the most isoated corners on the planet. Not to mention that his story also includes: strategic alliances, intrigue, bloody turmoil, an archaic geo-political scenario, romance, a person conviction in spirituality and predestination (something which Napoleon both publicly and personally endorsed throughout his carreer), and the gorgeous aesthetical climate of the late 18th and early 19th century. And all of this just a little over 200 years ago.
If predestination is real, Napoleon' case is perhaps the closest genuinely accepted example.
honestly i love to compare the hundred days period to a greek tragedy, there was a good day before each, but chaos led to tragedy, and those left behind has to rise to the challenge, hope is always at the fingertips of the main character, but their flaws always lead them to overextend, which always leads to their downfall one step away from glory
Idk bro, the war crimes wouldn't fit well to the mc
@@sandronecromancer counterpoint Anakin in Star Wars is one HELL of a warcriminal MC, and he is far from the only one
I could not have worded that better.
His Victory/Defeat Ratio is pretty high.
He must have increased France's ratio too.
Actualy no
France is the country with the most military victories in history. Literally the final boss in the game of empire. People with no knowledge of history has a prejudice based on the french collapse in 1940.
I think I've watched a video once where they said that Napoleon actually decreased France's victory to defeat ratio by around 3%, still, France is a beast, winning around 70% of its battles. It was a way back, though, so I don't remember what video it is.
@@OrionTails Napoleon 92%
@@OrionTails Moscow 1812!!!
Narrator has a unique voice , perfectly suited for Historical content!! Best wishes
Hw forgot te battle of Quatre bras tho
@@Theemperor.com.countrynapoleon wasn't at quatres bras
Love all your videos. Please make another one on Napoleon as a statesman. Unfortunately, this part of his life is usually missed...
Prince Talleyrand, Napoleon's foreign minister, famously observed, “You can do many things with bayonets except sit on them.”
"I have defeated the Austrians by simply marching"
-Napoleon crossing the alps
He also invaded and took Portugal! Thats a very important episode for us, brazilians, because it led to the escape of the portuguese royal family and court to Brazil…that became the first and only capital of an european empire outside Europe! Brazil developed much in this period…we were pretty much a huge farm colony until then. And then we got a national bank, international commerce, universities, theatres, developed streets, etc. After Napoleon fell, the portuguese king D. Joao VI didnt want to come back because he felt in love with Brazil 😂 He only came back after Portugal people threatned him to support his brother to take the throne if he stays in Brazil. And then, his son D. Pedro I was the one to declare de independence of Brazil. Anyway, glad Napoleon invaded Portugal…we owe that to France.
The portuguese royal family and court fled to Rio de Janeiro! Rio was the capital of the colony and then became the capital of Portugal…becoming only city in History that was a capital of an european empire outside Europe. Thanks Napoleon, greetings from Rio 🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷
🇫🇷🤝🇧🇷
didn't know that thank you for the information
Yes, the cowardly D. João VI abandoned Portugal to his fate, and fled to Brazil where he stayed on permanent vacation.
He never worried about Portugal and never sent any kind of help, although he knew about the massacres committed by the French and the destruction of food and land carried out by the English (the infamous burnt lands policy) to starve the French.
Due to French troops and the brutal practices of the English, Portugal lost between 10 and 20% of its population at that time, but this did not disturb the coxinhas in the slightest, who was busy with his mistresses and political intrigue in Rio de Janeiro.
The only time he remembered Portugal was to request troops with the intention of expelling Artigas and annexing Cisplatina!
In any case, he returned to Portugal due to the liberal revolution in Porto, which spread throughout the country, and culminated in an ultimatum that ordered the king to return quickly, under penalty of the monarchy being abolished and the Republic established.
I think D. João VI didn't even have any brothers, when he died the Portuguese crown was fought over (in a civil war) between his two sons, D.Pedro and D. Miguel.
Napoleon didn't "took" Portugal, French invade us three times, and were always kicked back.
Without Napoleon, Brazil would be much worse. I think he deserves a statue here.
Bro was the main character that lost his plot armor only after his reappearance on the last seasons
To see it layed out like this is more astounding than I would have thought. This all without one train ride EVER.
*Vive l'Empereur !* 🇫🇷
*Longue vie à Epic History TV !* ❣️
Napoleon is very dead!
@@davido3026 Yet his memory is immortal!
@@davido3026his legacy still lives
@@davido3026 when napoleons name is mingled with caesar, his name is not dead yet
Viva Empror
Since the first battle recorded (Battle of Kadesh 1274 BC), out of many commanders, Napoleon was the most successful of all.
Alexander the Great* he WON 100% of his battles.
@@REX-ROMANVShaving 100% win rate doesn't make you the best, I'd wager Scipio Africanus and Napoleon to be above Alexander
@@feduntu Also Alexander's highest casualties were 500 men in the Destruction of Thebes during his balkan campaign..
@@REX-ROMANVSBro it’s very different to fight with rifles and cannons to literally fight with wood. Casualties have to be higher in the first one lol right?
@@REX-ROMANVSGood point. But classical age battles are simpler in tactics, numbers, logistics. He faced a world that was not the strong in itself until india. Napolean was the best in an era of overwhelming military prowess from everyone, the speed and size and length of war time and battles. A force of nature is the only way to describe napolean.
This is great content!🇫🇷
Doesn't tell all though. He grievously lost The Battle of Trafalgar.
@@bonniemagpie9960though napoleon was not present in that battle.
Its the best content of the decade 🎉
You guys are the Best! Love your Napoleónic content ❤❤❤
He lived a glorious life...until the bitter and boring end on that island
Not many know this but the Austrians actually gave the blueprint to defeat Napoleon after they studied all their lost battles.
Really?
Miss him so much
Napoleon truly was the chosen one. He were meant to dismantle monarchy, not join them.
He hate england.
Una joyita todo lo que sube este canal. Saludos desde Perú. Como defiende Francia incluso con tanta desventaja, una locura
You forgot the one in the living room against Josephine when he got back from Egypt
That win loss ratio is absurd😭
Still decreased France overall ratio by around 3-4%
What is truly impressive are his victories against all odds not the ratio
@@AelricVarnis_1482 he went 50-8 bro stfu and stop trying to sound smart. How is winning 50+ battles to 8 losses not impressive
@ insulte were not needed thx.
I never said it was not impressive. But your comment was about the ratio I thought you be interested to know that though the ratio is nice, the odds against which he was fighting were more worthy of praise.
in the Polish anthem, Napoleon is shown as a hero
he was a killer, not a hero, he had no idea of what honor is, thats why he betrayed spain and lost against the spanish people, not the spanish army that didnt interfier with the french army
But poles saw him as a chance to regain their freedom. That's it
i feel like he only lost 1 battle per war
The man is legend
He was reckless in taking that large army to Russia even though he was advised by his generals to retreat for the winter which ended up killing more than half of the soldiers. And ultimately led to his downfall…”there is always a pride before a fall”
Nah . Half died walking in the Hot sun getting there and losing 80,000men at Borodino to beat the Russians . Biggest faux there ever is
It wasn't reckless, rather the opposite, too overthought! And in hindsight it's easy too say yeah ofcourse they would burn Moscow, but NO other nation burned their capital before and he marched on all of them! In a way he became the victim of his own succes. He thought he could sway Alexander; he couldn't.
Cool story, lot more went into it. Like Russia introducing scorched earth tactics. Napoleon underestimated the Russians' willingness to sacrifice their own land and resources to stop him especially the historic Moscow. But if a Russians were like other European countries and were more ego driven and less smart, as in Alexander decided to lose at first to win long term.
Also mentioning his Generals advice is blasphemous. Those idiots lost most of their wars when Napoleon wasn't around to lead them. They were brave but stupid mostly. If he had listened to them more often he wouldn't have had an empire.
@@zerothehero123the capital of Russia at that time was St. Petersburg
Amazing video. Shorts are good as it exposes zoomers to history! Keep it up
Best general of all time. Not even Caesar comes close.
Caesar isn't in the running...Alexander, Genghis Khan or Subutai.
@@thediaz07 or Khalid Ibn El Walid
@@thediaz07 This is an impossible list to make given the vast amount of time between them. They all existed in completely different worlds. Besides, Alexander has nothing on the rest of that list or even Ceasar for that matter.
@@kruger7796 Alexander literally never lost, despite fighting numerous different enemies with different tactics and strategies, despite ridiculous logistical challenges, despite being outnumbered on many occasions. He adapted and won every single time. Trying to exclude him is beyond ridiculous.
I highly disagree with you him being the greatest is highly debatable and In my opinion he is not
The sixth coalition even started to avoid direct battles against Napoleon in order to win
Napoleon was a titan, and without a doubt the most important figure of the modern age. Where he walked, the course of history changed.
i believe that figures like Colon and some other may be more important in the modern age
forget his military genius, remember this guy was known "for being worth 50,000 men on the battlefield" . his ability to lead a nation/ army was incredible
Greatest military mind of all time, there is no debate about it.
@Fatehali-yg3ky He was nowhere NEAR the General Napoleon was, its just a bit of Muslim propaganda cause they got noone else :D
Go home lil Muslim, he was a great General for his time, nothing more
@@vitanusthe issue is that you hate Khalid because side he was Arab Muslim. Had he been white or Christian y’all without a doubt would have put him above anyone else.
I mean y’all glaze belisarius who lost like 6 battles.
But no your Napoleon lost 10 times while having France (a superpower) backing him.
Khalid packed both superpowers with a flawless record. And legacy wise Khalid is also better as he cemented the caliphate as a global superpower for 3 centuries where as Napoleon lost all gains made by France and everything came to how it was, except maybe political and economical and military reforms.
@@1sultan189 The problem is (and I really don´t want to insult you here) that you seem to have absolutly no clue what you´re even talking about in terms of lost battles and the details surrounding those battles and campaigns.
I bet you don´t even know what Walid did in detail, you also seem to be heavily influenced.
I would advise you to watch at least the documentary about Napoleon on Kings and Generals.
You just cannot compare these two anyway, do you have the slightest idea how much more complex warfare was in Napoleons time, compared to the 7th century bc?
There is also the not so unimporetant fact, that the source material about the early Muslim conquest is VERY inaccurate, even mythical in some cases.
How many battle he won and how many he lost, noone can say for sure, some even claimed that he could have been an invention and other Muslim Generals of the time were used as inspiration from scholars to invent "Walid".
Oh and Eastern Rome and The Sassanids were in a decade long war prior to the Muslim Conquest, the only reason why the Arabs were able to conquer the middle east down to Egypt was because of that war and how much both empires were weakened.
But you have to look this up yourself, its never too late to learn.
@@vitanus There is no problem because what you said is simply not correct.
I know more about Khalid ibn Walid than you probably ever will my friend, in fact I have a whole playlist that I watched that describes around 30 or so of his battles along with their battle plans. I know particular details about the early Islamic conquest that you will not know unless you do intricate research like I did for 2 years. You think someone like kings and generals that miss a lot of details will make you sufficiently knowledgeable about this topic? If you think so my friend you’re dreaming.
I absolutely can compare, it’s not because Napoleon live in a more “complex” era than that means he is greater. Sure napoleon’s warfare was more advanced than Khalid obviously because of a 1200 year gap between them BUT Napoleon also enjoyed more and better logistical advantages and better organization than Khalid. And if we go by this claim that would mean a modern day general is better than Napoleon? What type of argument is this? We base skill based on adversity and disadvantages one faces and how he was able to surmount it aswell as the legacy he was able to leave.
Napoleon if compared to Khalid had a silver plater of advantages, for one he had access to France which was NOT a backwards nation it was already sophisticated and developed since the 1650s and had become a global superpower since the 1700s. This is an KNOWN fact that you can go look up. Sure Napoleon took over a weakened France but the issues France was suffering were surface level meaning it was fixable if a good leader came and changed some stuff (France had corrupt leaders before). And to compare France to the rest of Europe is like comparing USA to modern day Europe, France had every and the best and latest technologies and one of the strongest economies.
Also you made another biased claim that Muslim sources are “inaccurate” and “mythical” and I’ll ask you according to what consensus? What is so wrong with Arab sources? Arab sources are considered more reliable and accurate than contemporary Roman, Greek or even Chinese sources. As Arab Muslim sources didn’t just rely on writing but also word of mouth and lineage tracing. Meaning when an Arab source says something one can track back from who or when it was originally said. This is the same reason why the Quran and Hadiths are very reliable is because of a method of preserving the original sources via lineage tracing. You can sit there all you want to discredit Arab/muslim sources (we all know it’s out of racism/bias) but history and facts show that it’s extremely reliable. I’d also like to add that Arab sources coincidentally have the EXACT same claims as actual eye witnesses and Roman sources.
Also no Khalid’s existence is confirmed because a Christin eye witness in chronicle of Khuzistan literally called him by name and so did Heraclius, also we have clear lineage tracing of him too.
Romans and Persians were in a 26 year war before Arabs came, but this was customary of them to do, in the 6th century they had so many wars with each other. But the thing is when you actually analyze their supposedly “devastating” war you come to realize that in that 26 year war they suffered no more than 200k casualties combined and only 8 battles were fought.
Which per medieval standards is nothing just to tell you. In fact the Arabs before conquering the Persians and romans fought in a 30 year civil war and 1 year before their conquest they had the ridda wars (which alone took around 100k casualties in over 15 battles)
But I won’t blame you, if my ancestors got destroyed by a bunch of nomad Bedouins so flawlessly when they were a superpower I would also try to make up some excuses to discredit those “Arabs” 😂
"Greatest military mind of all time, there is no debate about it."
Certainly not, otherwise he wouldn´t have lost in the end.
Britain: fighting naked dudes with spears, and barely trained colonials and losing it when the colonials start learning.
Napoleonic French: Fighting all European Major powers like Prussia's military excellency, and also Britain, knocking them all in 5 out of 7 coalitions, most the time fighting them on the same battle.
How can even the Brits these days who speak bad about him, think they can compare their military history with this?
Wellington himself said that Napoléon's presence on the Battlefield was like having 20.000 men on the Battlefield
Probably the best general in history with Caesar Hannibal and some others
Others... Alexandre le Grand
@@gegebeh3703 Oh yes, he'd be on the top aswell for sure, also Belisarius, Ghenshin Khan, Khalid, Scipio Africanus, Sun Tzu and several others
That's what Suvorov said to Napoleon.
Alexander the Great is the best general in history. The guy didn’t lose a single battle and took down the Persian Empire with a comparatively tiny and unknown Macedonian Army. Done all that at the age of 21 too.
He was indeed one of the best military ⚔ strategist and conqueror the world 🗺 has seen. Remarkable warrior indeed, Napoleon Bonaparte was.
Vive la France, gloire à l'Empereur Napoleon 🇨🇵
Fun fact, Napoleon finaly defeated when his enemy didn`t fight him directly
A man spent 22 years on horseback and the result was the mighty French empire🇨🇵🇨🇵🇨🇵
@Epichistorytv please do it for others as well. In fact I’d take a minute summary of any major historic event. Not just the battles. From Alexander the Great to fall of Constantinople
Bro lost only a tiny handful of battles and won a shitload of them - no other generals in world history has a combat resume like his
lost in spain, and not against an army, just against farmers
and he did that before the deadline, what a legend.
The guy litterally won so mamy times, that his enemies were forced to do a collab n study this guy, ganged up on him all at once, cus they knew individually of them they couldnt win, only together they could. They feared him so much, thats incridble like only happens once in a million years
Thanks For this Guys! Missed these shorts
He is one of the reason why France holds THE best military record in history
not only that, but also a lot of battle won against England
@@yberai yes of course, the french did win the hundred years war after all
Probably the best general in History.
what nobody will tell you is that Napoleon fought for our modern ideals while everyone else fighting him fought to keep monarchs, the clergy, the bourgeoisie in power.
Basically, France wa the good guy here.
Not really; Napoleon fought for France and bled the rest of Europe dry with high taxes. He was hated in Spain and Germany; both countries are are still calling the war against Napoleons a "war of liberation".
And let us not forget that Napoleon crowned himself Emperor and became more and more tyrannically during his rule. He was not a real believed in republicanism or democracy. BUT he was an enlightened monarch.
@@xornxenophon3652Napoleonic Code, Bank of France, Council of State, Lycée System, Legion of Honor… Institutions of his creation are still a part of modern France. He crowned himself emperor because he was legitimately the ONLY person who could keep France from being controlled by the rest of Europe’s monarchs or collapsing back into disarray because of infighting. None of the other leaders could rally the public and particularly the military as well as him. He was not nobility like the rest of Europe, he was fighting against their established order like George Washington did. Those two men are shining examples of how non-noble “nobodies” could lead other nobodies into more democratic systems.
@@CarneyAsada101 Comparing Napoleon to George Washington shows a severe lack of political judgement.
George Washington could easily have become the first monarch of the US but declined and became "farmer George". Washington even declined to become president for life, because he saw it as a dangerous precedent for tyranny. He went home and counted on the constitution and the political institutions of his nation to keep politicians honest.
Napoleon, on the other hand, overthrew the democratic government and instituted a police-state. He eliminated all political opposition, imprisoned political enemies and instituted a censorship of the press.
Napoleon kept fighting wars, that France could not hope to win in the long run, instead of trying to reach an agreement with the UK and Russia. Talleyrand warned him in 1807 that his lofty political aims were not realistic, because he literally forced the other major powers to keep fighting against the domination by napoleonic France. Talleyrand was proven right!
Napoleon left France humbled, occupied and financially ruined, whereas George Washington created a nation that has stood the test of time to this very day!
Napoleon was certainly fighting the established order. BUT he did not replace it with anything even remotely democratic; even Napoleon himself did not claim so. He wanted to create his own dynasty! His rulership was more akin to enlightened absolutism than republicanism, let alone democracy. He was a man of many talents and did indeed reform France. But he was never interested in creating anything resembling a republic, let alone a democracy. Just look at the "constitution" created by Napoleon. Any modern dictator could work with that!
@@xornxenophon3652 bro literally the people against him were nobles and monarchs.
by your logic george washington named himself president and bled europe dry.
Our modern ideas are an absolute monarchy with total censorship, slavery, suppression of all opposition, sometimes with political assassinations, aren't they?)
Great historical content, I love it ❤❤❤
Napoleon is the greatest, but do not forget the incredible shape of the french army at that time.
Well, mostly. Even with an army in shit conditions he was able to win brilliant victories
At some point he had to fight battles with teenagers who had pratically no training.
Very true, but who was responsible for turning the ragtag revolutionary French army into the Grande Armee? Napoleon.
Oh wow I love this this is so good he is so talented
Contrary to what the English and Americans like to repeat, France has the highest number of battles and wars won in the world
It is ao funny, that he fought for the revolution and then declared himself emperor 😂😂
Just as Augustus crowned himself emperor to save the roman republic, Napoleon preserved the republican revolutionary ideas by becoming emperor and spreading them all over Europe.
It took me 10years of school lessons to learn this….where were you when I needed you when I was 5 😂…I’m nearly 70 now…interesting video thanks.
Really nice work! I like the popping flags for the battle sites.
Bro was literally Europe nightmare😂
and spain was napoleons nightmare
and marching his armies in a ruthless fast pace. damn this dude is a chad
The distance between Paris and Moscow is roughly the same as San Francisco and New York. The fact that the guy thought his troops would march all of it without proper logistics is beyond megalomaniac.
His tactic was to win fast victory and use the resources from won land to support his troop farther. The russis used scorched earth tactic and destroyed everything while retreating which forced nepo to slow down too
Finally a simple tour video
Brilliant.
Probably one of the best military commanders of all time
Napoleon was not the only
French marshals had no equals.
Marshals:
Louis Nicolas d’Avout,Joachim Murat
André Masséna,Jean Lannes,Jean-Baptiste Jules Bernadotte...
Bernadotte wasn't that good.
Only davout, lannes and suchet were a good general, the other just average 🫢🗿
Man is just accepting side quests at this point.
My Hero 😊
Incredible and genius, who changed everything in the world
VIVE NAPOLÈON!!! 💙🤍❤️
He really is the Goat!
Bros winrate is over 85%
It's amazing that one of the few defeats of Napoleaon was in the Mid East.
Probably the last head of state that actively led a nation’s military force in front line of battles. Abraham Lincoln came close.
Napoleon was no ordinary man. God took time to build a masterpiece
If he never attacked Russia, and used all of his power and resources to solidify his rule over the most of European continent, today we would be speaking French and not English. He would have changed the history in such a manner that French Empire would have had a much bigger impact on the entire world in every aspect.
We sneakily had it, the British mostly spread their defects while flourishing. By dying France lived on in the hearts of Europe, the US and it's colonies
“When Napoleon comes to us, we run, away.”
Napoleon and Meritocracy FTW
amazing short! make it subtitle in portuguese!
Greatest military general of all-time and it's not even close.
42 batallas victoriosas y unicamente 7 derrotas, talento de un genio militar.
ajaja en españa perdió
"Oh well, Alexander had to take on an empire with 40,000 elite soldiers led by competent commanders. While having the best possible education, what did Napoleon do? Pfft, take on several of the Europe's super powers at once and defeat them several times over, and at the start of his career was given a numerically smaller army, who were poorly drilled and equipped, and was fighting in northern italy, but then managed to defeat the piedomontese and austrians jsut a few weeks into his campaign. So?"
This is obviously satire. I just don't like people who compare Alexander the great to napoleon.
Yes bro, Napoleon only have few competent general like davout, lannes and suchet 🫢🗿
@@tititkukecilmukakujelek5914 true, but a lot of them couldn't hold independent command
40.000 soldiers with whom he had to conquer the largest empire at the time, far away from any supply lines, against Kings who always outnumbered him. Oh wow, that's a whole different story now eh?
PS. You really believe the other Kings he faced received no education? And by the way, Bonaparte also finished a military academy for your knowledge, he didn't start up from a farm house making military plans on his own.
@shieldwolfminiatures8645 Napoleon was given even fewer soldiers who were poorly trained, outnumbered, poorly equipped. He had to deal with govt bs, who just wanted to sabotage Napoleon rather than help Napoleon. Also, Alexander was given the best education possible at the time, with the best army. His father did all the work for him. Napoleon had to build his way up, he had to fight several empires at once like (Austrian Empire, Russian Empire, British Empire, and several other kingdoms).
Very interesting map. Thanks.
And it's nice to note that Berezina is marked as a victory, something most of French don't realize it was.
Wow. The entirety of the Napoleonic wars in just 3 minutes, history really is cool.
this is amazing!
The best military commander in History
Covering more about Napoleon's military history in 60 seconds compared to Ridley Scott fumbling for over 2 hours.
He subjugated all of those mighty countries - but he couldn't defeat ABBA.
Who's abba? Napoleon Sandwich Bonaparte won all of them !
Looks like this was last episode of Napoleon by epic history it was great videos thx epic history tv channel 🔥 no doubt he was greatest emperor he have more wins than other kings and generals
He was kicked from Spain rapidly
"rapidly" no, it was a long campaign.
It took the British, Portuguese, Spanish AND guerrillas YEARS to undo what Napoleon did in just a few months
Not to mention Napoleon’s focus was elsewhere entirely
My guy win so much battle that in order the enemies to win the battle... IS TO RUN AWAY.
bro fought 8 countries, all powerful european countries, still won almost all of the battles whenever he went, the losses of france, aka his marshals, only happened whenever he wasn't in.. He is literally the #1 general of all times. He literally surpass alexander, caesar, ghenghis khan or Khaled ibn al walid considering Napoleon was at war against 8 empires meanwhile the other so called conquerors were at war against only maximum 2 to 3 countries...
Stop chatting bull, you go on saying he was against the whole of Europe, the only time he was against them all together was from 1813-15 before then he was facing two nations at most.
@@ChrisCrossClash he was facing already 5 nations during first coalition and the campaign of Italy and Egypt
So shush 🤫
- Supported by a superpower (France)
- Had the best weaponry and military technology of Europe
- was not TERRIBLY outnumbered, ratio of 1:1,5 most of the time
- opponents were regional powers and not superpowers (except the British)
Bro still ended up losing 10 times.
- Khalid swept through both superpowers and their vassals,
- with a perfect record of 0 defeats,
-actually was able to impose his legacy unlike Napoleon after his death,
-had the most disadvantages and worst military odds arguably of all history yet was always winning.
Every time I see a Christian or a westerner I just know why they hate Khalid, cuz he was Arab and Muslim and truth is if he was Christian or a westerner he would be more valued.
But it doesn’t matter because the facts are in history which is on my side 😂💪
@@1sultan189
Considering the shortages of officers during the French Revolution, it was under poverty cuz the revolutionary wars happened after 7 years wars, while having to fight a coalition against all Europe externally, while fighting in a civil war at the same time internally and having a reign of terror with the smartest general of all times, Napoleon Bonaparte and even winning all the wars of coalition during republic era. Indeed, France won during Republic era all its wars of coalition, Napoleon defeating the brits at Toulon and the rest of the French revolutionaries defeated the rest of the coalition at Valmy.
Also British never confronted Napoleon in battle except in Toulon and Waterloo, in which the Brits outnumbered napoleon’s forces, yet napoleon won the battle of Toulon and in the battle of Waterloo it was impossible knowing Napoleon only had a small army against British army and Austrian army and Prussian army… that is cuz Napoleon just returned from exile..
So doesn’t matter, Napoleon still mogs everyone in terms of battles won
The ratio of 1:1,5 was only in small battles
In major battles, Napoleon was outnumbered most of the time.
Napoleon at Rivoli during the campaign of Italy, was given poor equipment and soldiers,
Even if He was outnumbered, surrounded and under heavy attack by the Austrians
Yet he managed to inflict 10x more loses on the enemy and captured their troops
Napoleon remains #1 cuz of his genius traps and stuff
Napoleonic wars is so much more complex that even Wellington has more major battles won than Khalid
Yet Napoleon has more battles won than Wellington…
Napoleon never confronted Wellington except in Waterloo when Napoleon returned from exile with a smaller army outnumbered by British and Austrian forces, cuz he lost half his troops only to desertion and diseases during summer and lost the rest during winter cuz his forces all died in Russia cuz of winter, shortage of food and cold, so Napoleon had to order a retreat despite the fact that the Russians retreated and ran away. The coalition plan to defeat Napoleon was to run away from Napoleon cuz they knew they couldn’t defeat Napoleon in battle, they had to attack his line of communications and his marshals in zones which Napoleon left to advance further.
But Napoleon conquered Moscow militarily speaking, tho the Russians were running away while burning their homes and taking their food to another city, so napoleonic troops were lacking logistically speaking food and shelter for winter…
Keep cry ng little bro
We know you’re just jealous
While Khalid fought against 2 disorganized confused empires who just had a war and didn’t know what was happening to them, who had lack of communication and stuff
Napoleon fought against a coalition of all Europe, who were perfectly organized in terms of communication, who planned together to stop Napoleon, who actually knew what they were doing, but Napoleon was still smarter.
@@revolutionariesoffreedom2374 You can sit here and act as if France was sent back to the stone ages all you want but history says otherwise. Sure France was disorganized and corrupt by its leaders but these were surface level issues that just needed a great leader to change. The underlying core components of France at that time was that it was a superpower. It had the most trained land army, the latest weaponry, the most experienced military of Europe, and one of the strongest economies in the world. It was in of itself a superpower that had issues, and so when Napoleon came he just fixed and organized the empire to bring it back to number 1. So let’s stop acting as if Napoleon had an army that were fighting with arrows and stones against “European might” that had fighter jets and nukes😂. France was the second or first superpower of the world before Napoleon came.
Then you went on to talk about battle of Toulon, the siege of Toulon literally saw an army of 32k French vs 23k “coalition”.
Sure Napoleon saved the battle but French sustained heavy casualties despite having 10k more troops than their opponents. If that’s peak of military prowess according to western standards that boy oh boy you people are in for a history shock if you realize other battles that happened in history.
In fact I challenge you give me the most outnumbered battle Napoleon participated in I can guarantee you it’s not all that. There’s been much more impressive than that.
You people seem to base your standards on how many victories without mentioning the winrate to loss rate ratio. Or the advantages a general had to begin, or the legacy and impact. Which is why the western standard of who is the greatest general is idiotic.
But sure a Napoleon that lost 10 times fighting regional and out of prime empires (Austrians, ottomans Holy Roman Empire) while having superpower status is somehow greater than Bedouins rag dolling 2 civilizations known for being the greatest at war (romans and Persians)?
Also you made a stupid claim they were weakened? According to which primary source? They fought 8 battles in their 26 years war which is nothing and sustained only 200k COMBINED casualties which is virtually no casualties.
I’m not jealous it’s just when I see stuff that are so blatantly wrong I have to point it out 😂
And in his last days in war they avoided facing him directly thats says it all.