What do you think?
Rate this book
The Napoleonic Wars: A Global History
Austerlitz, Wagram, Borodino, Trafalgar, Leipzig, Waterloo: these are the places most closely associated with the Napoleonic Wars. But how did this period of nearly continuous warfare affect the world beyond Europe? The immensity of the fighting waged by France against England, Prussia, Austria, and Russia, and the immediate consequences of the tremors that spread from France as a result, overshadow the profound repercussions that the Napoleonic Wars had throughout the world. In this far-ranging work, Alexander Mikaberidze argues that the Napoleonic Wars can only be fully understood with an international context in mind. France struggled for dominance not only on the plains of Europe but also in the Americas, West and South Africa, Ottoman Empire, Iran, India, Indonesia, the Philippines, Mediterranean Sea, and the Atlantic and Indian Oceans. Taking specific regions in turn, Mikaberidze discusses major political-military events around the world and situates geopolitical decision-making within its long- and short-term contexts. From the British expeditions to Argentina and South Africa to the Franco-Russian maneuvering in the Ottoman Empire, the effects of the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars would shape international affairs well into the next century. In Egypt, the Wars led to the rise of Mehmed Ali and the emergence of a powerful Egyptian state; in North America, the period transformed and enlarged the newly established United States; and in South America, the Spanish colonial empire witnessed the start of national-liberation movements that ultimately ended imperial control. Skillfully narrated and deeply researched, here at last is the complete global story of the period, one that expands our contemporary view of the Napoleonic Wars and their role in laying the foundations of the modern world.
936 pages, Hardcover
First published February 10, 2020
About the author
Alexander Mikaberidze
40 books56 followersAlexander Mikaberidze is assistant professor of European history at Louisiana State University in Shreveport. He holds a degree in international law from Tbilisi State University (Republic of Georgia, 1999) and a Ph.D. in history from Florida State University (2003). After working for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Georgia (1996-2000), he taught European and Middle Eastern history at Florida State and Mississippi State Universities and lectured on strategy and policy for the U.S. Naval War College. For his contributions to the Napoleonic studies, he has been awarded the International Napoleonic Society's Legion of Merit Medal and La Renaissance Française's Médaille d'or du Rayonnement Culturel.
Dr. Mikaberidze specializes in the 18th-19th century Europe, particularly the Napoleonic Wars, and the military history of the Middle East. In addition to his articles, Dr. Mikaberidze has written and edited nine books, including Conflict and Conquest in the Islamic World: Historical Encyclopedia (2011), Napoleon's Great Escape: The Crossing of the Berezina (2010), The Battle of Borodino: Napoleon versus Kutuzov (2007), Historical Dictionary of Georgia (2007), The Russian Officer Corps in the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, 1792-1815 (2005, winner of the 2005 Literary Prize of the International Napoleonic Society), The Czar’s General: The Memoirs of a Russian General in the Napoleonic Wars (2005).
Dr. Mikaberidze specializes in the 18th-19th century Europe, particularly the Napoleonic Wars, and the military history of the Middle East. In addition to his articles, Dr. Mikaberidze has written and edited nine books, including Conflict and Conquest in the Islamic World: Historical Encyclopedia (2011), Napoleon's Great Escape: The Crossing of the Berezina (2010), The Battle of Borodino: Napoleon versus Kutuzov (2007), Historical Dictionary of Georgia (2007), The Russian Officer Corps in the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, 1792-1815 (2005, winner of the 2005 Literary Prize of the International Napoleonic Society), The Czar’s General: The Memoirs of a Russian General in the Napoleonic Wars (2005).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 111 reviews
April 6, 2021
The Napoleonic Wars: A Global History, by Alexander Mikaberidze, is a magisterial new work on the Napoleonic Wars, focusing on these wars from a global perspective, and looking at how events in these wars changed the face of Europe and the world through the birth of greater imperialism and global scrambling, the beginnings of practical German and Italian nationalism, and the hegemony of Britain and their Empire, which spanned the world. The French revolution gave birth to numerous ideas in some form, or encouraged their implementation through the abolishment of Ancien Régime societies. New forms of administration centered on administrative control, taxation, raising levies, and supplying vast armies became the norm for states large and small in Western and Central Europe, and influenced ideas and movements in the Americas, Asia and African states, and led to the creation of military-state complexes where state revenues, generated by taxation, encouraged larger and larger armies, which then encouraged more revenue generation. These all have direct reverberations into the modern world in some form.
Even so, Mikaberidze's history is not just focused on these measures. There are blow by blow accounts of campaigns across the globe, and geopolitical maneuvers that would be influential into the 19th and 20th centuries. Russia and Britain's Great Game - a struggle for supremacy in Central Asia which focused on land routes into Britain' all important Indian colony, had their birth in this war. Napoleon harboured grand, but potentially realistic plans to invade India by taking Egypt, and assaulting India from any number of routes from there - Suez to Red Sea, overland through the Ottoman Empire and Persia, and/or with Russian support through Central Asia. The latter almost happened - Emperor Paul sent a group of Cossacks to India to measure out support for an overland invasion in Afghanistan and Northern India - all areas at the time outside of British control. This would encourage Britain to prioritize sea access to India, both through domination of the Mediterranean, as Britain sought to occupy and formerly annex Malta, through the growing geopolitical realization of the importance of Egypt and African control for European colonial domination in Asia. In the Western Hemisphere, Napoleon's grand ambitions, and the geopolitical consequences of the Napoleonic Wars, would see eventual South American independence, fronted by the loss of Portugal's metropole the court's removal to Brazil, and by the Enlightenment inspired Simon Bolivar, who fought in the Peninsular War, and would lead a Napoleon style campaign to free South American from Spanish rule, and unite the former colonies in a short lived state to try and forge their own destinies. In the United States, the Napoleonic Wars ushered in an era of expansion and hemispheric geopolitics that the young state had not yet known; the US at time deftly played the warring parties, acquiring French Louisiana, and pushing into Florida due to the weakness of French and Spanish naval power, fought the Quasi-War against French privateers, and later Barbary pirates. It would use its leverage against Britain to try and attain concessions, leading to the outbreak of the War of 1812, seen in North America as an isolated conflict between old foes, but in reality heavily dependent on the events of the Napoleonic War, still raging in Europe.
Reams and reams of books have been written on Napoleon and the campaigns of this series of wars, and many of them contain the biases and nationalistic histories of Britain and France, and to a lesser extent, Russia, Germany and Italy. This text takes the whole in a Longue durée style history that examines the politics, diplomacy, warfare and geopolitics of the era, and the compounding effects decisions in one area of the globe had on the other. This may seem immaterial, but is somewhat novel when it comes to examining this previously Euro-centric war. Although most of the principle actors of this conflict were European powers, this war had a massive effect on the development of Imperialism in the 19th and 20th centuries, as well as the diplomatic maneuvers and alliance building that would come to dominate these centuries. These changes would have a monumental effects on the globe, from the British annexation of India, to the colonial maneuvers in the South Pacific, to the scramble for Africa, and the early de-colonialist movements in South America which would go on to inspire many a revolutionary over the one-hundred and fifty years. This book ties this principles and concepts in well, and looks at the perspectives of peoples and governments across the globe, and how they reacted to these changes while trying to stay afloat in a turbulent time of global conflict.
Not much more can be said, save that I would highly recommend this book for those looking for a modern inspection of the Napoleonic Wars. This book utilizes the most up-to-date scholarship available, as well as the newer form of denationalized historiography, to examine the details of this conflict from a more neutral and unbiased perspective. A wholly enjoyable book, this will be a pleasure to read for any history buff out there looking for a denationalized lens to examine this conflict.
Read
February 29, 2020A big fat history of the Napoleonic Wars that for once doesn't focus maniacally on the pestiferous little Corsican - my full review here:
https://openlettersreview.com/posts/t...
https://openlettersreview.com/posts/t...
March 15, 2020
The ambition of this work—to relate the familiar events of the wars of 1792-1815 to events throughout the world—is certainly a worthy one, and generally, it succeeds.
It’s something of a cliché for historians of this period to be either pro- or anti-Napoleon; Mikaberidze acknowledges that his entry to the subject was via admiration of Bonaparte, though he forswears that view now. I would say, ‘mostly’: he’s about the most balanced I have seen, but still more inclined to giving the French a pass, and to claim easy equivalences between British acquisitiveness and the French tendency to re-make whole societies for French benefit, to award perfect marks for balance. Significantly, I don’t think he ever discusses what French ‘modernization’ consisted of beyond increasing the efficiency of control and revenue extraction.
The structure to handle the breadth of the topic involves a lot of back-tracking as the author shifts from one region to another. I found myself struggling to keep track of relative chronologies. In general, one may say that it’s easier to see how the conflict in Europe had an effect elsewhere, than the effects of elsewhere on the European conflict. There are some explorations of economics and logistics, but more would probably be useful. It would also help to have some consideration, beyond a few specific instances, of the speed of communication and the diffusion of information.
Finally, it seems worth mentioning that the maps are just not as good as one would wish. Two side-by-side maps centered on the Indian subcontinent, for example, are of slightly different scales, with different cities in- or excluded, making comparison of their shaded regions contrasting control over time a challenge. Another map appears to have the labels for Denmark and Norway reversed (they are, it becomes apparent from a later map, a single, combined entity). And “Caspain Sea”? OUP, shame.
Overall, a worthy effort. I don’t think it quite proves that the broader context is essential for a proper account of its central conflict, but it certainly shows the account is richer for it.
It’s something of a cliché for historians of this period to be either pro- or anti-Napoleon; Mikaberidze acknowledges that his entry to the subject was via admiration of Bonaparte, though he forswears that view now. I would say, ‘mostly’: he’s about the most balanced I have seen, but still more inclined to giving the French a pass, and to claim easy equivalences between British acquisitiveness and the French tendency to re-make whole societies for French benefit, to award perfect marks for balance. Significantly, I don’t think he ever discusses what French ‘modernization’ consisted of beyond increasing the efficiency of control and revenue extraction.
The structure to handle the breadth of the topic involves a lot of back-tracking as the author shifts from one region to another. I found myself struggling to keep track of relative chronologies. In general, one may say that it’s easier to see how the conflict in Europe had an effect elsewhere, than the effects of elsewhere on the European conflict. There are some explorations of economics and logistics, but more would probably be useful. It would also help to have some consideration, beyond a few specific instances, of the speed of communication and the diffusion of information.
Finally, it seems worth mentioning that the maps are just not as good as one would wish. Two side-by-side maps centered on the Indian subcontinent, for example, are of slightly different scales, with different cities in- or excluded, making comparison of their shaded regions contrasting control over time a challenge. Another map appears to have the labels for Denmark and Norway reversed (they are, it becomes apparent from a later map, a single, combined entity). And “Caspain Sea”? OUP, shame.
Overall, a worthy effort. I don’t think it quite proves that the broader context is essential for a proper account of its central conflict, but it certainly shows the account is richer for it.
May 2, 2022
A Colossal Achievement.
Dr Alexander Mikaberidze has impressed me with this book, due to the sheer volume of the subject matter and detail imposed. The book covers The Napoleonic Wars and its implications on the military, economic and political fortunes of states and factions in every corner of the earth. It excellently shows how individual states were pulling against each other as they had their own agendas, aspirations and local problems, which not effected their ability to curb the rise of the French Empire, but ultimately influenced impact and outcome of 10 years of fighting. These distractions as Mikaberidze explains, allowed Napoleon to rise as he did and change the course of history forever. This is a must read for anyone who is interested in the period. There is so much I didn’t know, for example the impacts on Iran, The Ottoman Empire or Japan and why they ultimately became involved.
The book is not a sweeping summary which leaves too many questions of ‘why?’ Or ‘how?’ Nor does it get bogged down in too much fine grain detail. This isn’t a military history as battles or tactics described and should be viewed as a overview to the global conflict. Mikaberidze himself is a good writer, I was engaged throughout and I didn’t find this book a hard slog. He does however, lean towards a pro-Napoleon stance, but at the same time is an admirer of other figures, such as Metternich, Wellington and Tsar Alexander I.
The structure is for the most part chronological, but some chapters concentrating on geographical locations. I found this works well as it is easier to concentrate on a focused subject rather than bouncing from one theme or area to another. I will be definitely revisiting certain chapters again as I haven’t been able to find this information elsewhere, however full books are required for detail and understanding of a lot of aspects. For example, individual campaigns or battles, the major figures or internal affairs and politics of each country. I recommend this book and really enjoyed reading it.
Dr Alexander Mikaberidze has impressed me with this book, due to the sheer volume of the subject matter and detail imposed. The book covers The Napoleonic Wars and its implications on the military, economic and political fortunes of states and factions in every corner of the earth. It excellently shows how individual states were pulling against each other as they had their own agendas, aspirations and local problems, which not effected their ability to curb the rise of the French Empire, but ultimately influenced impact and outcome of 10 years of fighting. These distractions as Mikaberidze explains, allowed Napoleon to rise as he did and change the course of history forever. This is a must read for anyone who is interested in the period. There is so much I didn’t know, for example the impacts on Iran, The Ottoman Empire or Japan and why they ultimately became involved.
The book is not a sweeping summary which leaves too many questions of ‘why?’ Or ‘how?’ Nor does it get bogged down in too much fine grain detail. This isn’t a military history as battles or tactics described and should be viewed as a overview to the global conflict. Mikaberidze himself is a good writer, I was engaged throughout and I didn’t find this book a hard slog. He does however, lean towards a pro-Napoleon stance, but at the same time is an admirer of other figures, such as Metternich, Wellington and Tsar Alexander I.
The structure is for the most part chronological, but some chapters concentrating on geographical locations. I found this works well as it is easier to concentrate on a focused subject rather than bouncing from one theme or area to another. I will be definitely revisiting certain chapters again as I haven’t been able to find this information elsewhere, however full books are required for detail and understanding of a lot of aspects. For example, individual campaigns or battles, the major figures or internal affairs and politics of each country. I recommend this book and really enjoyed reading it.
March 2, 2021
There are a handful of conflicts that have, since childhood, grasped, firmly, my imagination and have refused to let go. The War Between the States (the American Civil War to non Southerners), the Eastern Front (both World Wars), the rise of Republican Rome, Alexander's conquests, and, jermain to this book, the Napoleonic Wars.
There is something about the aura of Napoleon, more than just his outstanding battlefield exploits, which tends to enthrall people. It's not at all hard to see why so many people, who may not even enjoy history, normally, are taken in by it once they are confronted with Napoleon.
Alexander Mikaberidze's book is indeed a global history of this epic conflict, and for even those who can consider themselves astute students of the period, he delivers something new to learn. No other author has, ever, showcased the Napoleonic Wars as what it truly was: a world war.
Far more than just a massive conflict between the British Empire and the French Napoleonic Empire, the Napoleonic Wars encompassed most of the world, and involved not only all of the European powers, major and minor, it also involved the Ottomans, the Persians, the colonial states of Latin America, Qing China, India, the Barbary Kingdoms of North Africa, and the United States of America.
Because Mikaberidze paints such a broad picture, even with 642 pages of main text (at what seems to be ten point font, and tight spacing, too, this really is an enormous tome), he simply can't go into the level of detail that he can in a work focused on a single battle or campaign. However, what he accomplishes is to put the Napoleonic Wars into the context of the entirety of the world, and how they really were the catalyst for the modern world.
Besides just narrating all of the European campaigns of the Revolutionary Wars and the conquests, and collapse, of the Napoleonic Empire, he also showcases: the revolt against Spain all over Latin America and the Latin American wars for independence. The American War of 1812 against the British. The Serbian revolt under Karajorjie against the Ottomans that dragged in the Russians. The Russo-Ottoman War(s). The Russo-Persian War. The American-Barbary War. The Russo-Swedish War. The Danish-Swedish War. And numerous other conflicts that are normally ignored in conventional histories of the Wars that focus exclusively on Europe from the French perspective. He, successfully, ties all of these conflicts into the main, overarching, conflict with convincing analysis and causation, and shows how they impacted the main conflict in Europe.
And for those concerned that the author is an academic, Alexander Mikaberidze is a fine writer, and his works are always enjoyable to read through. While it is a heavy tome, with small print size, and tight spacing, it's not a chore to read at all.
This work, alongside Chandler's "Campaigns of Napoleon", has become one of the pillars of Napoleonic history.
Couldn't recommend this one highly enough.
There is something about the aura of Napoleon, more than just his outstanding battlefield exploits, which tends to enthrall people. It's not at all hard to see why so many people, who may not even enjoy history, normally, are taken in by it once they are confronted with Napoleon.
Alexander Mikaberidze's book is indeed a global history of this epic conflict, and for even those who can consider themselves astute students of the period, he delivers something new to learn. No other author has, ever, showcased the Napoleonic Wars as what it truly was: a world war.
Far more than just a massive conflict between the British Empire and the French Napoleonic Empire, the Napoleonic Wars encompassed most of the world, and involved not only all of the European powers, major and minor, it also involved the Ottomans, the Persians, the colonial states of Latin America, Qing China, India, the Barbary Kingdoms of North Africa, and the United States of America.
Because Mikaberidze paints such a broad picture, even with 642 pages of main text (at what seems to be ten point font, and tight spacing, too, this really is an enormous tome), he simply can't go into the level of detail that he can in a work focused on a single battle or campaign. However, what he accomplishes is to put the Napoleonic Wars into the context of the entirety of the world, and how they really were the catalyst for the modern world.
Besides just narrating all of the European campaigns of the Revolutionary Wars and the conquests, and collapse, of the Napoleonic Empire, he also showcases: the revolt against Spain all over Latin America and the Latin American wars for independence. The American War of 1812 against the British. The Serbian revolt under Karajorjie against the Ottomans that dragged in the Russians. The Russo-Ottoman War(s). The Russo-Persian War. The American-Barbary War. The Russo-Swedish War. The Danish-Swedish War. And numerous other conflicts that are normally ignored in conventional histories of the Wars that focus exclusively on Europe from the French perspective. He, successfully, ties all of these conflicts into the main, overarching, conflict with convincing analysis and causation, and shows how they impacted the main conflict in Europe.
And for those concerned that the author is an academic, Alexander Mikaberidze is a fine writer, and his works are always enjoyable to read through. While it is a heavy tome, with small print size, and tight spacing, it's not a chore to read at all.
This work, alongside Chandler's "Campaigns of Napoleon", has become one of the pillars of Napoleonic history.
Couldn't recommend this one highly enough.
March 22, 2022
Excellent account of the Napoleonic era and its influence across the world
August 8, 2020
The Napoleonic Wars: A Global History by Alexander Mikaberidze.
This book is neither a biographical history of Napoleon Bonaparte, nor is it a detailed account of the various battles of continental expansionism generally written by historians of Napoleon. The book is all the better for it.
The French Revolutionary Wars of the late 18th century provide the historical bookmark from which Napoleon emerges as a highly competent military leader, and the base from which he quickly rose to political power. The book briefly covers how Napoleon leverages the political and revolutionary ideals of the time to ascend rapidly to becoming Emperor of France. He was both a talented military man and savvy politician. The author espouses a nuanced and balanced view of Napoleon, neither lauding him or criticising him to any great extent. The author argues that whilst Napoleon brought death and misery to the continent, he was a man of the times and wasn’t unique amongst his contemporaries to have notions of grandeur and tyrannical dreams of empire. The author also argues he also brought administrative efficiency and aspects of liberalism born during the French Revolutionary Wars to the entire continent.
The book deals with the military aspects as campaigns of France against the rest of Europe, ordered from the first to seventh wars of the coalitions. The primary thrust of the narrative is more focused on the political implications of each of the wars as well as the social and economic impacts each bore. The author doesn’t focus much on Napoleon, the battles are briefly covered, his study is more on the political ramifications, the alliances, treaties, and especially impact on the colonies and the new world. It’s not a book the goes into much detail about the order of battle and has very little on Napoleon as a man.
This book, written by an academic, obviously is dense with detail and requires a keen focus for its entirety. From my perspective, it provides a good place to start a journey to discover the implications of the Napoleonic Wars, with a wide, top down approach to the Napoleonic period. This provides the macro view from which a reader may want to dive into each of the battles, Napoleon the man and the history of the prime powers of France, Britain, Prussia, Russia, Austria, Persia and Ottoman empires of the 19th century.
Highly recommended for readers interested in 19th Century History and those interested in the geopolitical and macroeconomic implications of the Napoleonic wars and their immediate after effects, both within Europe as well as the colonial empires of the Americas and the Indies.
5 Stars
This book is neither a biographical history of Napoleon Bonaparte, nor is it a detailed account of the various battles of continental expansionism generally written by historians of Napoleon. The book is all the better for it.
The French Revolutionary Wars of the late 18th century provide the historical bookmark from which Napoleon emerges as a highly competent military leader, and the base from which he quickly rose to political power. The book briefly covers how Napoleon leverages the political and revolutionary ideals of the time to ascend rapidly to becoming Emperor of France. He was both a talented military man and savvy politician. The author espouses a nuanced and balanced view of Napoleon, neither lauding him or criticising him to any great extent. The author argues that whilst Napoleon brought death and misery to the continent, he was a man of the times and wasn’t unique amongst his contemporaries to have notions of grandeur and tyrannical dreams of empire. The author also argues he also brought administrative efficiency and aspects of liberalism born during the French Revolutionary Wars to the entire continent.
The book deals with the military aspects as campaigns of France against the rest of Europe, ordered from the first to seventh wars of the coalitions. The primary thrust of the narrative is more focused on the political implications of each of the wars as well as the social and economic impacts each bore. The author doesn’t focus much on Napoleon, the battles are briefly covered, his study is more on the political ramifications, the alliances, treaties, and especially impact on the colonies and the new world. It’s not a book the goes into much detail about the order of battle and has very little on Napoleon as a man.
This book, written by an academic, obviously is dense with detail and requires a keen focus for its entirety. From my perspective, it provides a good place to start a journey to discover the implications of the Napoleonic Wars, with a wide, top down approach to the Napoleonic period. This provides the macro view from which a reader may want to dive into each of the battles, Napoleon the man and the history of the prime powers of France, Britain, Prussia, Russia, Austria, Persia and Ottoman empires of the 19th century.
Highly recommended for readers interested in 19th Century History and those interested in the geopolitical and macroeconomic implications of the Napoleonic wars and their immediate after effects, both within Europe as well as the colonial empires of the Americas and the Indies.
5 Stars
April 1, 2020
I actually didn’t finish this book, which is most of the reason I had a hard time giving it three stars, which I hardly give to any book, mostly cause I’m picky about what I read, especially on this topic.
The first hundred pages deserve a lot of credit, but after that it just starts deteriorating into jumping to every corner of the world repeatedly every 100 pages or so. I understand it’s a global perspective, and I appreciate the attempt, much like attempts to do books on say the Seven Years War, which seem equally hard to do. The problem with this strategy is that it’s turning into analytical rambling about multiple topics with no real endgame in sight. This should really be about 4-5 books to make it less confusing and easier to follow. It’s political explanations are spot on in its defense, but when it tries to do the military it falls flat on its face. Makes me not even want to read his analysis of Waterloo.
Overall, I am disappointed I didn’t like this book as much as I could have. I will probably reread it later on and try again.
The first hundred pages deserve a lot of credit, but after that it just starts deteriorating into jumping to every corner of the world repeatedly every 100 pages or so. I understand it’s a global perspective, and I appreciate the attempt, much like attempts to do books on say the Seven Years War, which seem equally hard to do. The problem with this strategy is that it’s turning into analytical rambling about multiple topics with no real endgame in sight. This should really be about 4-5 books to make it less confusing and easier to follow. It’s political explanations are spot on in its defense, but when it tries to do the military it falls flat on its face. Makes me not even want to read his analysis of Waterloo.
Overall, I am disappointed I didn’t like this book as much as I could have. I will probably reread it later on and try again.
April 13, 2022
4.5/5 for the sheer heft and scope of the work, but takes some discipline to get through. This book does not need to be read sequentially and can be used as a reference for specific periods. The author will reference related events in different chapters. Though the book bears the namesake of Napoleon, he does not make many appearances throughout it. The author takes the reader on a history of what amounts to great power politics on a global scale as a result of the French Revolution and subsequent conquests of Napoleon. For each region and war the author presents the diplomatic, military, and economic context. The astonishing fact of this work is that the concept of globalization is not new and the impacts of events in one region of the world have consequences elsewhere. The post-Napoleonic peace shaped the world's order until the 20th Century, and even some conflicts and security concerns today have roots that can be traced to this period.
January 29, 2024
Empecemos diciendo un hecho que considero probado, hay personajes en la historia, y en otros ámbitos de nuestra vida, que generan fans; Julio César es uno de ellos, otro es Rommel y así podríamos mencionar unos cuantos; y no hay duda de que Napoleón es uno de ellos.
En mi caso, he de reconocer, que yo estoy en el bando contrario, me parece un personaje genial, pero deleznable y al que la ambición le hizo desbarrar.
Dicho esto, pasemos al libro que es lo importante. Bastante bueno, hasta podríamos decir que muy bueno ya que se sale del ámbito europeo para contemplar las guerras napoleónicas desde una perspectiva mundial, que es lo justo. El autor maneja las fuentes con destreza y , aunque en algunos puntos se queda algo corto, tampoco es algo que se le pueda reprochar ya que de no hacerlo el libro en vez de 900 páginas sin contar las notas y la bibliografía, se iría a 2.000 0 3.000, algo muy manejable si leemos en el metro.
Ahora viene el pero se relaciona con la parte inicial del post. El autor es un fan de Napoleón, el mismo lo reconoce en la introducción, y, si bien, trata de ser objetivo, hay algunos momentos en el que se le ve el plumero. Cosas que son perdonables en Francia o su líder no lo son en otras potencias. Napoleón no tiene defectos y si pierde es por fallos de sus subordinados. Los enemigos no ganan por sus dotes sino por fallos franceses, que no de Napoleón… El ejemplo más claro es la insistencia en que Napoleón comprendía todos los aspectos de la guerra (económico, naval, etc.) y que no cometió errores estratégicos, ¿Cómo es que entonces perdió? Pues porque en realidad, si cometió errores estratégicos, si le falló la comprensión de los factores económicos y navales (junto a otros) y le pudo la ambición. Ser un genio no implica ser infalible.
Dicho esto, me reitero, un gran libro, un muy buen libro. Uno no tiene que estar de acuerdo al 100% con un libro para valorarlo.
En mi caso, he de reconocer, que yo estoy en el bando contrario, me parece un personaje genial, pero deleznable y al que la ambición le hizo desbarrar.
Dicho esto, pasemos al libro que es lo importante. Bastante bueno, hasta podríamos decir que muy bueno ya que se sale del ámbito europeo para contemplar las guerras napoleónicas desde una perspectiva mundial, que es lo justo. El autor maneja las fuentes con destreza y , aunque en algunos puntos se queda algo corto, tampoco es algo que se le pueda reprochar ya que de no hacerlo el libro en vez de 900 páginas sin contar las notas y la bibliografía, se iría a 2.000 0 3.000, algo muy manejable si leemos en el metro.
Ahora viene el pero se relaciona con la parte inicial del post. El autor es un fan de Napoleón, el mismo lo reconoce en la introducción, y, si bien, trata de ser objetivo, hay algunos momentos en el que se le ve el plumero. Cosas que son perdonables en Francia o su líder no lo son en otras potencias. Napoleón no tiene defectos y si pierde es por fallos de sus subordinados. Los enemigos no ganan por sus dotes sino por fallos franceses, que no de Napoleón… El ejemplo más claro es la insistencia en que Napoleón comprendía todos los aspectos de la guerra (económico, naval, etc.) y que no cometió errores estratégicos, ¿Cómo es que entonces perdió? Pues porque en realidad, si cometió errores estratégicos, si le falló la comprensión de los factores económicos y navales (junto a otros) y le pudo la ambición. Ser un genio no implica ser infalible.
Dicho esto, me reitero, un gran libro, un muy buen libro. Uno no tiene que estar de acuerdo al 100% con un libro para valorarlo.
October 24, 2023
The Napoleonic Wars is one of the best researched books on the period. On my kindle the book ends at 48% and the rest is covered by references. This is a monumental book that covers all of the conflicts related to the Napoleonic Wars.
It starts with the French revolution, then the various wars from the First to the Seventh Coalition but it also covers the many other fronts and conflicts including the Latin American rebellions, the Ottoman-Turkish wars, the Iranian-Turkish wars, the various Swedish-Danish-Russian wars, the War of 1812, the Serbian revolution, the fleet and colonial battles between the French and the English in the West Indies, the Cape, Indian Ocean and even all the way to Indonesia and Japan.
There are however some big drawbacks, unfortunately the author is not a very good storyteller. The book is very dry and quite cumbersome. This is no Andrew Roberts or Adam Zamoyisky keeping you on the edge of your seat.
There is also a lot of minute detail in some areas but very little detail in other areas. Mainly, the battles are given very little attention. Only a few battles got more than a line, they are mostly just mentioned. Instead there is a lot of detail on diplomacy with a whole chapter dedicated to the negotiations for the Peace of Amiens.
In the end the information of the book is fantastic for any Napoleonic enthusiast but the delivery leaves a lot to be desired.
It starts with the French revolution, then the various wars from the First to the Seventh Coalition but it also covers the many other fronts and conflicts including the Latin American rebellions, the Ottoman-Turkish wars, the Iranian-Turkish wars, the various Swedish-Danish-Russian wars, the War of 1812, the Serbian revolution, the fleet and colonial battles between the French and the English in the West Indies, the Cape, Indian Ocean and even all the way to Indonesia and Japan.
There are however some big drawbacks, unfortunately the author is not a very good storyteller. The book is very dry and quite cumbersome. This is no Andrew Roberts or Adam Zamoyisky keeping you on the edge of your seat.
There is also a lot of minute detail in some areas but very little detail in other areas. Mainly, the battles are given very little attention. Only a few battles got more than a line, they are mostly just mentioned. Instead there is a lot of detail on diplomacy with a whole chapter dedicated to the negotiations for the Peace of Amiens.
In the end the information of the book is fantastic for any Napoleonic enthusiast but the delivery leaves a lot to be desired.
April 28, 2021
I wish I could give this book a more positive review, because it is a thorough analysis of how the Napoleonic Wars shaped modern Europe. But it has serious flaws that became increasingly jarring to me as I continued to read it.
First, the strengths: The Napoleonic Wars is detailed and analyzes both the major and minor campaigns in depth. One point that Mikaberidze makes is that events in one theater of the war often had implications far away. That insight helps the reader see the interconnectedness of what would otherwise appear to be disparate events. Another of his themes is that the Napoleonic Wars were actually the world's first global conflict. And while the Napoleonic Wars can be seen as not one, but as a series of interconnected conflicts, that point is valid. The level of detail is impressive; for many of the major battles and diplomatic developments, Mikaberidze often provides day-by-day accounts, which helps the reader see how various events unfolded. The scholarship necessary to produce such a work is extremely impressive. Mikaberidze also demonstrates an excellent grasp of the diplomatic and strategic goals of the major participants, which illuminates their long-term interests, such as France's desire for European hegemony and Britain's goal of protecting its maritime supremacy and colonial empire. He is also clear on how the various state actors pivoted tactically in response to battlefield and diplomatic developments. Finally, there are many fine embedded essays on how politics and modernization were unfolding in many of the peripheral participants.
But even with those strengths, the books has some notable defects. My overarching complaint is bias. Mikaberidze acknowledges in the preface that Napoleon was his childhood hero; he claims that as an adult he has developed a more measured view that acknowledges his shortcomings and failures. But the Franco-philic center of the The Napoleonic Wars is clear, as is the implicit hostility to Britain, whom he views as Napoleonic France's chief antagonist. The bias manifests itself in many ways; French losses or failures are often justified or explained in mitigating terms. And Mikaberidze openly laments what he views as French strategic errors, positing alternative sympathetic developments that might have rescued the French. A good example is the relatively brief account of Napoleon's disastrous invasion of Russia. It is generally accepted that the Russian campaign was the beginning of the end for Napoleonic France. But despite its importance, the war gets a very summary retelling; far more minor military campaigns are covered in far greater detail. And while Mikaberidze acknowledges the French defeats, his account contains the kind of justifications and what-if hypotheses that I found so irritating. In contrast, when the British err, his criticisms are pointed, and are rarely accompanied by the type of excuses he regularly makes for the French. Even when the British triumph, Mikaberidze often finds fault for not achieving bigger or more lasting victories. While a reader conscious of Mikaberidze's bias can scrutinize his accounts in light of his tilt, there remains nevertheless an echo of hagiography that has no place in a work of serious scholarship.
The second problematic aspect of the Franco-philic predisposition is a failure to account for the burdens that French occupation of Europe placed on its inhabitants. While praising the efficiency of Napoleon's administrative changes in the occupied lands, Mikaberidze pays short shrift to how French occupation harmed the lives of citizens of the occupied nations. One of the changes Napoleon imposed was the so-called Continental System, which was an attempt to compel France and its occupied territories to convert their economies into a form of autarchy to cut off English trade, and thus its wealth. But the Continental System was somewhere between a failure and a disaster, which Mikaberidze doesn't fully acknowledge. In general, autarchy deprives consumers of the benefits of international trade, which generally results in poorer quality goods on offer and higher prices. And in a continent the size of Europe, with its enormous coastlines, autarchy is doomed to fail due to the ease of defeating it through smuggling. Yet Mikaberidze largely dismisses both the magnitude of the smuggling, but also the degree to which the occupied nations resented the reduction in the standard of living it imposed on them.
My other chief complaint is that the books is weakly written and sloppy. It is far too long; Mikaberidze's style is unnecessarily discursive. With disciplined copy editing, this book could easily have been 10-15% shorter without truncating content. As I read it, I repeatedly saw how sentences and whole paragraphs could have been tightened. A wordy book is a ponderous read; even though I was very interested in the subject, I struggled through it. I was also bothered by the use of cliches, which might be appropriate for conversation, but which stuck out in a scholarly work. Phrases like "at the end of the day," and "boots on the ground" are problematic in several ways and they illustrate the book's problem with prolixity. The cliches don't add to the reader's understanding and their vernacular tone is wrong for serious scholarship. The sloppiness in copy editing also sticks out: some of the problems include sentences with words dropped and verbs in improper tenses. I was surprised to see that The Napoleonic Wars was published by Oxford University Press, I would have expected a higher level of oversight.
First, the strengths: The Napoleonic Wars is detailed and analyzes both the major and minor campaigns in depth. One point that Mikaberidze makes is that events in one theater of the war often had implications far away. That insight helps the reader see the interconnectedness of what would otherwise appear to be disparate events. Another of his themes is that the Napoleonic Wars were actually the world's first global conflict. And while the Napoleonic Wars can be seen as not one, but as a series of interconnected conflicts, that point is valid. The level of detail is impressive; for many of the major battles and diplomatic developments, Mikaberidze often provides day-by-day accounts, which helps the reader see how various events unfolded. The scholarship necessary to produce such a work is extremely impressive. Mikaberidze also demonstrates an excellent grasp of the diplomatic and strategic goals of the major participants, which illuminates their long-term interests, such as France's desire for European hegemony and Britain's goal of protecting its maritime supremacy and colonial empire. He is also clear on how the various state actors pivoted tactically in response to battlefield and diplomatic developments. Finally, there are many fine embedded essays on how politics and modernization were unfolding in many of the peripheral participants.
But even with those strengths, the books has some notable defects. My overarching complaint is bias. Mikaberidze acknowledges in the preface that Napoleon was his childhood hero; he claims that as an adult he has developed a more measured view that acknowledges his shortcomings and failures. But the Franco-philic center of the The Napoleonic Wars is clear, as is the implicit hostility to Britain, whom he views as Napoleonic France's chief antagonist. The bias manifests itself in many ways; French losses or failures are often justified or explained in mitigating terms. And Mikaberidze openly laments what he views as French strategic errors, positing alternative sympathetic developments that might have rescued the French. A good example is the relatively brief account of Napoleon's disastrous invasion of Russia. It is generally accepted that the Russian campaign was the beginning of the end for Napoleonic France. But despite its importance, the war gets a very summary retelling; far more minor military campaigns are covered in far greater detail. And while Mikaberidze acknowledges the French defeats, his account contains the kind of justifications and what-if hypotheses that I found so irritating. In contrast, when the British err, his criticisms are pointed, and are rarely accompanied by the type of excuses he regularly makes for the French. Even when the British triumph, Mikaberidze often finds fault for not achieving bigger or more lasting victories. While a reader conscious of Mikaberidze's bias can scrutinize his accounts in light of his tilt, there remains nevertheless an echo of hagiography that has no place in a work of serious scholarship.
The second problematic aspect of the Franco-philic predisposition is a failure to account for the burdens that French occupation of Europe placed on its inhabitants. While praising the efficiency of Napoleon's administrative changes in the occupied lands, Mikaberidze pays short shrift to how French occupation harmed the lives of citizens of the occupied nations. One of the changes Napoleon imposed was the so-called Continental System, which was an attempt to compel France and its occupied territories to convert their economies into a form of autarchy to cut off English trade, and thus its wealth. But the Continental System was somewhere between a failure and a disaster, which Mikaberidze doesn't fully acknowledge. In general, autarchy deprives consumers of the benefits of international trade, which generally results in poorer quality goods on offer and higher prices. And in a continent the size of Europe, with its enormous coastlines, autarchy is doomed to fail due to the ease of defeating it through smuggling. Yet Mikaberidze largely dismisses both the magnitude of the smuggling, but also the degree to which the occupied nations resented the reduction in the standard of living it imposed on them.
My other chief complaint is that the books is weakly written and sloppy. It is far too long; Mikaberidze's style is unnecessarily discursive. With disciplined copy editing, this book could easily have been 10-15% shorter without truncating content. As I read it, I repeatedly saw how sentences and whole paragraphs could have been tightened. A wordy book is a ponderous read; even though I was very interested in the subject, I struggled through it. I was also bothered by the use of cliches, which might be appropriate for conversation, but which stuck out in a scholarly work. Phrases like "at the end of the day," and "boots on the ground" are problematic in several ways and they illustrate the book's problem with prolixity. The cliches don't add to the reader's understanding and their vernacular tone is wrong for serious scholarship. The sloppiness in copy editing also sticks out: some of the problems include sentences with words dropped and verbs in improper tenses. I was surprised to see that The Napoleonic Wars was published by Oxford University Press, I would have expected a higher level of oversight.
March 3, 2024
The audible experience would probably be 2-3 stars but I put a high value on authoritative content, which this book has in spades. I think I personally would have enjoyed it more if I read it and not listened to it.
This is also the first book I’ve read about the Napoleonic Wars, and that it aimed to cover the conflict from a global perspective, interested me. I suspect much of the research out there is fairly Eurocentric, yet the early 19th century was a time where nations, states, peoples and continents had regular interaction with one another and their histories intertwined together. Whatever decisions Bonaparte made, or that the coalitions made, had far-reaching consequences. And that’s exactly what this book is about. It was fun listening to how American and Canadian history was weaved into the narrative and so many other nations and peoples were not left out.
Yet this book is long, perhaps too long for some. If you read it, definitely plan on a long term commitment.
This is also the first book I’ve read about the Napoleonic Wars, and that it aimed to cover the conflict from a global perspective, interested me. I suspect much of the research out there is fairly Eurocentric, yet the early 19th century was a time where nations, states, peoples and continents had regular interaction with one another and their histories intertwined together. Whatever decisions Bonaparte made, or that the coalitions made, had far-reaching consequences. And that’s exactly what this book is about. It was fun listening to how American and Canadian history was weaved into the narrative and so many other nations and peoples were not left out.
Yet this book is long, perhaps too long for some. If you read it, definitely plan on a long term commitment.
December 12, 2022
Many modern histories attempt to shoehorn some local or European event into a "global" history. Yet after reading this book, it is impossible to understand the Napoleonic Wars as anything but a global story. Yes, Napolean reshaped Europe indelibly. His consolidation of the hundreds of German principalities into 36 sovereigns, plus Prussia and Austria, and consolidating those into the "Confederation of the Rhine," paved the way for German nationhood. After Napoleon's 1807 Treaty of Tilsit with Russia, which incorporated that empire into his "Continental System" banning trade with Britain, Russia made war on the Swedish government to stop contraband there and managed to incorporate Finland into its orbit. Soon Sweden elected a former French marshal as its new king and invaded Norway, thus united those two lands. The war also caused the Ottoman Empire to give Russia free access through the Straits and increased influence in the Slavic countries.
But the war reshaped much of the globe. Of course, during the war the revolution in French Haiti led to the first independent republic led by former slaves, and the sale of Louisiana by the French to the U.S. enlarged that territory, and the War of 1812 in America over British attacks on American trading with France led to the securing of the Northwest territory for the U.S. But the French invasion of Spain in 1808 was a direct cause of the subsequent revolts and juntas that emerged in South America in the following years, including Father Hidalgo's revolt in Mexico in 1811 and Simon Bolivar's first independent Venezuelan Republic in the same year. (Britain tried to invade these countries and support some of the rebels against French-leaning Spanish princes.) Britain also managed to capture Cape Town in South Africa, Ceylon in India, and many Pacific Islands from the Dutch when they were under French suzerainty. Because of French outreach to Indianian princes like the Marathas and Mysore, Governor General Wellesley and his followers vastly expanded the size of the British East India Company army and conquered much of the continent. Interest in India also meant that both the French and British concluded treaties with the Qajars of Iran in an effort to secure their influence there (and support them in recovering the caucasian countries from Russia). The Ottoman Sultan Selim III's failed attempts to modernize the army (with new Nizam-i Cedid units) and to fight France in Egypt and Russia in the North led to his overthrow and a new, much weaker Ottoman sultanship under Mahmud II (1808-1839). A British fleet even invaded Macao in China after its Portuguese overlords were invaded by France, and attacked Dutch ships in the Japanese port of Nagasaki. There was indeed no part of the globe that was not touched by the Napoleonic Wars.
The problem, especially in the latter half of this book, is that the only through-line tying some of the facts together is that they happened between 1792 and 1815. There is little attempt at prioritization, or a clear narrative. Instead, there is often a recitation of battles and generals, as in the simplest military histories. Still, this is the first book I've read that gives the full scope of these wars their due, and which places the next two hundred years in the context of those wars.
But the war reshaped much of the globe. Of course, during the war the revolution in French Haiti led to the first independent republic led by former slaves, and the sale of Louisiana by the French to the U.S. enlarged that territory, and the War of 1812 in America over British attacks on American trading with France led to the securing of the Northwest territory for the U.S. But the French invasion of Spain in 1808 was a direct cause of the subsequent revolts and juntas that emerged in South America in the following years, including Father Hidalgo's revolt in Mexico in 1811 and Simon Bolivar's first independent Venezuelan Republic in the same year. (Britain tried to invade these countries and support some of the rebels against French-leaning Spanish princes.) Britain also managed to capture Cape Town in South Africa, Ceylon in India, and many Pacific Islands from the Dutch when they were under French suzerainty. Because of French outreach to Indianian princes like the Marathas and Mysore, Governor General Wellesley and his followers vastly expanded the size of the British East India Company army and conquered much of the continent. Interest in India also meant that both the French and British concluded treaties with the Qajars of Iran in an effort to secure their influence there (and support them in recovering the caucasian countries from Russia). The Ottoman Sultan Selim III's failed attempts to modernize the army (with new Nizam-i Cedid units) and to fight France in Egypt and Russia in the North led to his overthrow and a new, much weaker Ottoman sultanship under Mahmud II (1808-1839). A British fleet even invaded Macao in China after its Portuguese overlords were invaded by France, and attacked Dutch ships in the Japanese port of Nagasaki. There was indeed no part of the globe that was not touched by the Napoleonic Wars.
The problem, especially in the latter half of this book, is that the only through-line tying some of the facts together is that they happened between 1792 and 1815. There is little attempt at prioritization, or a clear narrative. Instead, there is often a recitation of battles and generals, as in the simplest military histories. Still, this is the first book I've read that gives the full scope of these wars their due, and which places the next two hundred years in the context of those wars.
Shelved as 'dnf'
February 19, 2024I rarely bail out on a history audiobook but I was just retaining nothing here. The narrator was truly awful. Time to move on.
November 12, 2021
This history contains a fascinating look at the man Napoleon, and the domino events that cascaded across the continents of Earth in his time. Yes! It is a mesmerizing read! Can you possibly be mesmerized for two long months? Apparently, since this has kept me absorbed for that long. It has been the single best history book on the French Revolution and Napoleonic Era that I have read. The author has done an excellent job of compiling this thorough history. It is also simple enough for the casual reader to understand without doing further research. Just be aware that he covers so much that it will take time to absorb it all. Also, the footnotes themselves are pretty extensive and would provide info on further reading, if you want to read even more.
Concurrent with this massive tome, I've been (re)reading an equally massive collection of all of the Complete Works of Shakespeare. What stands out to me is the fact that Shakespeare's 'Histories, written in the late 16th-early 17th century, covered a time when England had conquered much of France. Meanwhile, this Napoleonic Era of the late 18th-early 19th century, covered a time when France warred with England and conquered much of the continent of Europe. It seems like the Franco/Anglo conflict covered much of four centuries.
I was also intrigued by many of the events happening in the Americas during this era. For example, he covers the fact that Napoleon's invasion of Russia happened at the same time as the American attack on Canada. Where I thought I knew much about the invasion of Moscow, I had no real concept of the overview of why Napoleon invaded Russia in the first place. While I knew about many of the administrative changes Napoleon made around Europe, I knew nothing about his Continental plan that basically aimed to strangle British trade on the continent of Europe. Yes, I learned a lot here.
The Napoleonic Wars: A Global History is a comprehensive survey of the Napoleonic Era; its coalitions, battles, and the sweeping political changes of the era. While the book is 936 pages in hardback, that most certainly will not be enough room to cover everything in detail. What the author has done is cover the important events in a coherent format, while tying everything into a global perspective. So, while you will see events transpiring on all continents, you won't see detailed troop movements. While you get a good explanation of strategies and geographical layouts of the important battles, you won't be following the boots on the ground in any great depth. While the important naval and land army strengths of each country is laid out in overview, you won't see a deep discussion of military hardware... you get the point... it's a comprehensive survey.
If you want an honest straightforward overview of Napoleon, the changes he made in the world, the battles on the continent, the seas, and the world-wide changes sweeping the globe; then I highly recommend Mikaberidze's book. It is perfect for a good absorbing non-fiction read for quiet evenings, when you want to get lost in a book for a couple of cold months. I picked it up at Barnes & Noble in the hardback edition. It is definitely something that I will refer to again and again.
May 3, 2021
Una absoluta obra maestra de como escribir historia global. Alexander Mikaberidze pone las guerras napoleónicas en el contexto en que deben ser tratadas como una verdadera guerra global y por lo tanto, con consecuencias políticas y económicas que llegaron a cada rincón del planeta.
El detalle de las consecuencias de cada aspecto de las guerra desde las guerras revolucionarias a Tilsit; del sistema continental a la Paz de Viena y las consecuencias de la hegemonía naval británica en América y Asia, hacen al libro una lectura indispensable para entender casi cada región del mundo en siglo XIX. Quizá la única parte en que hubiera sido mejor un tratamiento más detallado es lo relativo a los sucesos en las Americas. Quizá por razones de espacio se decidió tratar las independencias en el continente en un solo capítulo y aunque se reconoce que es quizá en América donde se dieron las consecuencias mas radicales de los conflictos en Europa, no se les trata con el mismo nivel de detalla que si recibe Estados Unidos, el Imperio Otomano y la India.
No obstante, es un libro sumamente relevante para entender el mundo moderno, las repercusiones políticas (el surgimiento de nacionalismos, la expansión de la economía liberal, la influencia de la administración napoleónica en la modernización burocrática del mundo, innovaciones diplomáticas como el uso moderno de las reparaciones, etc. Es un libro que al mismo tiempo resalta la genialidad de Bonaparte y sus tremendas fallas de carácter, su habilidad política y militar y la enormidad de la época, un periodo de verdadera transformación en el mundo.
Mikaberidze logra algo realmente inusual, poner la figura de Napoleón en el contexto de su tiempo, una era de imperios donde las grandes naciones actuaban como imperios. Contrario a la caricatura que se suele hacer del periodo como “las guerras desatadas por la ambición de un hombre”, el libro lo que hace es poner en su contexto adecuado el conflicto, las ambiciones de Napoleón no era distintas de las de Inglaterra o de Rusia, extender sus imperios, lograr la hegemonía en el mundo. La diferencia entre ellos estaba en la naturaleza del tipo de orden internacional que querían y en tener los intereses de sus naciones al frente. Esta naturaleza de esa era es lo que le dio a las Guerras Napoleónicas su alcance global, fue un periodo que forjo y derrumbo imperios de alcance global.
En este año que además está lleno de conmemoraciones, el Année Napoléon por los 200 años de la muerte de Napoleón que se cumplen este 5 mayo y por los 200 años de las Independencias de casi todo América Latina (en buena parte resultado de las guerras napoleónicas) hacen aún más divertida su lectura.
El detalle de las consecuencias de cada aspecto de las guerra desde las guerras revolucionarias a Tilsit; del sistema continental a la Paz de Viena y las consecuencias de la hegemonía naval británica en América y Asia, hacen al libro una lectura indispensable para entender casi cada región del mundo en siglo XIX. Quizá la única parte en que hubiera sido mejor un tratamiento más detallado es lo relativo a los sucesos en las Americas. Quizá por razones de espacio se decidió tratar las independencias en el continente en un solo capítulo y aunque se reconoce que es quizá en América donde se dieron las consecuencias mas radicales de los conflictos en Europa, no se les trata con el mismo nivel de detalla que si recibe Estados Unidos, el Imperio Otomano y la India.
No obstante, es un libro sumamente relevante para entender el mundo moderno, las repercusiones políticas (el surgimiento de nacionalismos, la expansión de la economía liberal, la influencia de la administración napoleónica en la modernización burocrática del mundo, innovaciones diplomáticas como el uso moderno de las reparaciones, etc. Es un libro que al mismo tiempo resalta la genialidad de Bonaparte y sus tremendas fallas de carácter, su habilidad política y militar y la enormidad de la época, un periodo de verdadera transformación en el mundo.
Mikaberidze logra algo realmente inusual, poner la figura de Napoleón en el contexto de su tiempo, una era de imperios donde las grandes naciones actuaban como imperios. Contrario a la caricatura que se suele hacer del periodo como “las guerras desatadas por la ambición de un hombre”, el libro lo que hace es poner en su contexto adecuado el conflicto, las ambiciones de Napoleón no era distintas de las de Inglaterra o de Rusia, extender sus imperios, lograr la hegemonía en el mundo. La diferencia entre ellos estaba en la naturaleza del tipo de orden internacional que querían y en tener los intereses de sus naciones al frente. Esta naturaleza de esa era es lo que le dio a las Guerras Napoleónicas su alcance global, fue un periodo que forjo y derrumbo imperios de alcance global.
En este año que además está lleno de conmemoraciones, el Année Napoléon por los 200 años de la muerte de Napoleón que se cumplen este 5 mayo y por los 200 años de las Independencias de casi todo América Latina (en buena parte resultado de las guerras napoleónicas) hacen aún más divertida su lectura.
May 21, 2024
Mikaberidze puts together a historical tour de force in this volume. There is so much here to unpack— this is a military and political history of just about the entire world from 1792-1815– and it is done masterfully. The author is always clear and explains issues concisely. In fact, I found myself constantly impressed at his ability to condense events that I was familiar with to just a few sentences. While it may lack detail for some, there are more than enough other resources if that’s what you want. This is a global history, and such sacrifices must be made.
I found myself a bit lost in the beginning of the book, as my knowledge of 18th century Europe is lacking, but once the young Corsican artillery officer came onto the stage, I was able to follow events quite easily. Occasionally there are chronological jumps backward between chapters as the author moves to discuss other regions, but these are easily taken into account when looking at a print copy, rather than audiobook (I primarily listened, then went back to the print book to look at maps and skim to clarify).
Speaking of the print copy, the maps are indeed a bit lacking. I often found myself confused trying to match the patterns to the key, and sometimes I couldn’t even find a match. Nevertheless, they at least gave me the gist of the region.
Lastly, Mikaberidze really shines in the final third of the book. His account from the Russian campaign of 1812 onward had me eager for my commute to listen to more, and the 100 days was masterfully done as well, conveying the attitude of the French people and the atmosphere Napoleon’s reascension created. Additionally, the final chapter on the impact of the war was sobering and contemplative, truly driving home the scale of this global conflict.
I found myself a bit lost in the beginning of the book, as my knowledge of 18th century Europe is lacking, but once the young Corsican artillery officer came onto the stage, I was able to follow events quite easily. Occasionally there are chronological jumps backward between chapters as the author moves to discuss other regions, but these are easily taken into account when looking at a print copy, rather than audiobook (I primarily listened, then went back to the print book to look at maps and skim to clarify).
Speaking of the print copy, the maps are indeed a bit lacking. I often found myself confused trying to match the patterns to the key, and sometimes I couldn’t even find a match. Nevertheless, they at least gave me the gist of the region.
Lastly, Mikaberidze really shines in the final third of the book. His account from the Russian campaign of 1812 onward had me eager for my commute to listen to more, and the 100 days was masterfully done as well, conveying the attitude of the French people and the atmosphere Napoleon’s reascension created. Additionally, the final chapter on the impact of the war was sobering and contemplative, truly driving home the scale of this global conflict.
June 18, 2023
Absolutely fascinating material and mind-boggling time period of history. Napoleon's military genius is the stuff of legend but even as a history buff I never learned anything specific about his rise to power and total domination of Europe until I decided to read this. This glimpse into the past was stunning. The frequency with which maps couldn't be completed quickly enough to be accurate and entire nations srang into and out of existence in what seems like the blink of an eye was breathtaking. In the context of the Russia-Ukraine war, this book really helped me wrap my head around the logic of territorial expansion and why it is so deeply ingrained in Russian foreign policy.
I couldn't give it five stars because the book jumped around so many times that I'm pretty sure that I reread each major sequence of events at least four times as the author retold it in the context and from the perspective of each different nation/empire involved. It got quite tedious because the retelling would get longer each time to make sure you remembered the perspectives of each nation/empire covered previously. This constant rehashing and jumping between time periods made me feel like I had historical whiplash. Content was good enough that it still gets four stars!
I couldn't give it five stars because the book jumped around so many times that I'm pretty sure that I reread each major sequence of events at least four times as the author retold it in the context and from the perspective of each different nation/empire involved. It got quite tedious because the retelling would get longer each time to make sure you remembered the perspectives of each nation/empire covered previously. This constant rehashing and jumping between time periods made me feel like I had historical whiplash. Content was good enough that it still gets four stars!
January 5, 2024
Definitely not an entry level work, despite impressions you might get from the title The Napoleonic Wars focuses much more on the diplomacy of the period then the actual conflicts, it also brushes over certain political events within countries like Napoleon crowning himself Emperor, it's good for what it is but I'd only recommend to fans of the era who already have an idea of what's going on, I also didn't agree with certain conclusion that the author came to, but can't deny the immense knowledge and understanding it took to write a book like this.
March 18, 2024
3.75/5
Audiobook better at increased speeds.
Basically a college class on the global impacts and strategies of all parties during the reign of Napoleon. Not for the faint of heart. Lots of battle discussion and sociopolitical/economic context for each series of wars.
Audiobook better at increased speeds.
Basically a college class on the global impacts and strategies of all parties during the reign of Napoleon. Not for the faint of heart. Lots of battle discussion and sociopolitical/economic context for each series of wars.
December 21, 2023
jesus christ
March 9, 2022
A rough slog, but it is exactly as the title describes...A Global History. You could create a drinking game based on the overuse of the word "Hegemony".
March 6, 2021
Impressive overview of the period between 1793 & 1815. A more apt title would have been world history for these 2 decades as all regions in the world are touched upon.
But this also already hints at a weaker part in the book: so much is touched upon that sometimes certain events remain opaque. Especially India &. North America are treated too cursory: or delve deeper into it and risking few hundred pages extra or remain out of it.
But the insights one gets concerning the Decline of the Spanish bourbons or the fading out of the holy empire, the difficulties opposing turkey and Iran, are certainly worth the read.
One’s appetite is certainly triggered to know more about the enigmatic tsar Alexander I and how he came to play such an important role in making Russia such a strong empire.
But this also already hints at a weaker part in the book: so much is touched upon that sometimes certain events remain opaque. Especially India &. North America are treated too cursory: or delve deeper into it and risking few hundred pages extra or remain out of it.
But the insights one gets concerning the Decline of the Spanish bourbons or the fading out of the holy empire, the difficulties opposing turkey and Iran, are certainly worth the read.
One’s appetite is certainly triggered to know more about the enigmatic tsar Alexander I and how he came to play such an important role in making Russia such a strong empire.
July 24, 2021
I am writing from the point of view of a scholar fond of facts, endless references, and encyclopedic indexes. Therefore, my ratings do not reflect a universal opinion about a book. The Napoleonic Wars is a "tour de force," a book so substantive that it will be used by most as a reference book (Full disclosure: I might be biased about the subject, as my gg grandfather was the private lawyer of the Bonapartes).
September 14, 2023
The immense scope of Alexander Mikaberidze's The Napoleonic Wars: A Global History comes close to being its undoing. It is a book of remarkable breadth and a sprawling roster of characters, nations, and protagonists/antagonists.
Alexander Mikaberidze audaciously attempts to look at the world from 1789-1815 from the perspective of how Napoleon's warmongering policies reverberated across the globe. (Readers anxious for a blow by blow account of Napoleon's battles would be better off looking elsewhere; they are just as likely to hear about Father Miguel Hidalgo and early nineteenth century Latin American independence movements as they are Joaquim Murat and the Italian Wars.)
Perhaps the strongest portion of the book directly related to the Napoleonic Wars was the section documenting the Peninsular campaign. Mikaberidze really goes in-depth on this fighting, detailing the Dos de Mayo uprising of 1808 and the intervention of Britain in Portugal and Spain. The Duke of Wellington first makes his appearance in this conflict, and the extent to which Britain intervened on the ground demonstrated how much of a strategic threat Napoleon had become by 1807.
Even more than his botched Russian invasion, the author holds up Napoleon's Spanish intervention as the single worst mistake of his military career.
From foolhardily installing his brother Joseph as the new Spanish monarch to becoming distracted from the Peninsular fighting due to troubles in the German lands and Russia, the Petit Caporal was shown to be at his worst when directing the fighting in Spain and Portugal from afar. Early successes rained down during 13 Vendemaire and the Italian campaigns all the way through the 1802 Treaty of Amiens and 1805's Battle of Austerlitz. Like Hitler after conquering Paris in 1940, the author leaves the impression Napoleon would have been better off had he stopped at his peak and not bit off more than he could chew (by invading Spain and Portugal).
The book's thread goes something like this: Napoleon's fighting in Europe (and the 1799 battles in Egypt) created ripple effects well beyond the Grand Armee's specific theaters of fighting. The War of 1812 between the U.S. and Britain is an example of one such effect. Britain's impressment of American sailors, one of the casus belli of that particular conflict, was largely brought about as a result of England's war on the continent and on the seas against France.
The Peninsular War draining the attention of Spain's government from their American colonies resulted in numerous rebellions and independence movements from Mexico to Venezuela and New Granada. Readers who cracked The Napoleonic Wars: A Global History's pages not expecting to read about Simon Bolivar will be in for quite a surprise. Additionally, King Pedro I's flight from Portugal to Brazil in 1807 as a result of Napoleon's invasion destabilized the situation in Brazil and led to yet another independence movement in that populous South American polity.
The unsettled nature of Russo-French relations saw the two empires going from amity during the Treaty of Tilsit negotiations to a bitter war five years later. Thanks to Russia's Czar Alexander I and Napoleon's love-hate relationship, the Scandinavian and Germanic nations often found themselves as pawns in one side or the other's game. Fighting between Sweden (one of Napoleon's former top marshals, Jean-Baptiste Bernadotte, was prince regent of Sweden in 1810 and then became its king in 1818) Finland, and Norway engulfed Scandinavia during these years as well.
Even Denmark is not spared, with Copenhagen ruthlessly bombarded by the Royal Navy in 1807. As with much of the friction during these years, this revolved around efforts to enforce (or evade) Napoleon's Continental System. Britain's Orders in Council were their answer to this system, and this too created a cascading effect of disagreement and conflict.
The French invasion of Russia and the deterioration of Napoleon's bond with Czar Alexander I was brought about in a huge way by flouting of the Continental System's dictates.
The Russo-Ottoman War (1806-1812) comes in for a surprising amount of analysis. The relationship between the Ottomans and Napoleon is an interesting one, as Sultan Mahmud II often seems unsure if France or Russia pose the bigger long-term challenge to the empire. In addition to this, this six year war is looked at within the context of how it stressed Russia's military capacities prior to Napoleon's ill-advised invasion.
The book reads at times like the recounting of a chess match.
Diplomats like Austria's Klemens von Metternich are at the top of their game, and France's Charles-Maurice Talleyrand appears (justifiably so) quite duplicitous as Napoleon's prospects dim. The book rolls through the stories of seven anti-Napoleonic alliances, with British Prime Ministers William Pitt the Younger and William Greenville piecing together European nations into continental bulwarks against Napoleon's ambitions. The adoption of balance of power politics, which would by and large hold through 1914, were a major impact of this era's conflicts.
Discussion of Napoleon's love life is almost nonexistent; mentions of Marie Louise only come within the context of her familial relation to the Austrian emperor. There is surprisingly little in-depth analysis of Napoleon's marshals, as Jean-de-Dieu Soult and Michel Ney show up in battles but do not have their back stories deeply delved into. The Napoleonic conflicts' global ramifications and the grand strategies of France and their enemies constitute ninety-percent plus of the content.
Alexander Mikerabidze came close to drowning the story in its own weight. There are simply so many different balls in the air-from the Mughal Empire in India to the Seminole Indians in Spain's Florida territory-that some portions become a bit confusing. But this is all done in the service of demonstrating just how far reaching the fallout from Napoleon's invasions reached, and in this respect the book checks off its objective.
Because of this, readers who have read biographies of Napoleon or books focusing on battles like Leipzig or Waterloo will still find plenty to mine in The Napoleonic Wars. It provides a fresh perspective in the sense that overlooked elements of this era are placed front and center in various portions of the narrative.
There is a lot to unpack and a lot of subplots in this work of nonfiction, but the whole creates a sum better than any individual part. Students of the Napoleonic era will get a lot out of this book, and even those with deep knowledge of it are likely to learn something new by absorbing what it has to convey.
-Andrew Canfield Denver, Colorado
Alexander Mikaberidze audaciously attempts to look at the world from 1789-1815 from the perspective of how Napoleon's warmongering policies reverberated across the globe. (Readers anxious for a blow by blow account of Napoleon's battles would be better off looking elsewhere; they are just as likely to hear about Father Miguel Hidalgo and early nineteenth century Latin American independence movements as they are Joaquim Murat and the Italian Wars.)
Perhaps the strongest portion of the book directly related to the Napoleonic Wars was the section documenting the Peninsular campaign. Mikaberidze really goes in-depth on this fighting, detailing the Dos de Mayo uprising of 1808 and the intervention of Britain in Portugal and Spain. The Duke of Wellington first makes his appearance in this conflict, and the extent to which Britain intervened on the ground demonstrated how much of a strategic threat Napoleon had become by 1807.
Even more than his botched Russian invasion, the author holds up Napoleon's Spanish intervention as the single worst mistake of his military career.
From foolhardily installing his brother Joseph as the new Spanish monarch to becoming distracted from the Peninsular fighting due to troubles in the German lands and Russia, the Petit Caporal was shown to be at his worst when directing the fighting in Spain and Portugal from afar. Early successes rained down during 13 Vendemaire and the Italian campaigns all the way through the 1802 Treaty of Amiens and 1805's Battle of Austerlitz. Like Hitler after conquering Paris in 1940, the author leaves the impression Napoleon would have been better off had he stopped at his peak and not bit off more than he could chew (by invading Spain and Portugal).
The book's thread goes something like this: Napoleon's fighting in Europe (and the 1799 battles in Egypt) created ripple effects well beyond the Grand Armee's specific theaters of fighting. The War of 1812 between the U.S. and Britain is an example of one such effect. Britain's impressment of American sailors, one of the casus belli of that particular conflict, was largely brought about as a result of England's war on the continent and on the seas against France.
The Peninsular War draining the attention of Spain's government from their American colonies resulted in numerous rebellions and independence movements from Mexico to Venezuela and New Granada. Readers who cracked The Napoleonic Wars: A Global History's pages not expecting to read about Simon Bolivar will be in for quite a surprise. Additionally, King Pedro I's flight from Portugal to Brazil in 1807 as a result of Napoleon's invasion destabilized the situation in Brazil and led to yet another independence movement in that populous South American polity.
The unsettled nature of Russo-French relations saw the two empires going from amity during the Treaty of Tilsit negotiations to a bitter war five years later. Thanks to Russia's Czar Alexander I and Napoleon's love-hate relationship, the Scandinavian and Germanic nations often found themselves as pawns in one side or the other's game. Fighting between Sweden (one of Napoleon's former top marshals, Jean-Baptiste Bernadotte, was prince regent of Sweden in 1810 and then became its king in 1818) Finland, and Norway engulfed Scandinavia during these years as well.
Even Denmark is not spared, with Copenhagen ruthlessly bombarded by the Royal Navy in 1807. As with much of the friction during these years, this revolved around efforts to enforce (or evade) Napoleon's Continental System. Britain's Orders in Council were their answer to this system, and this too created a cascading effect of disagreement and conflict.
The French invasion of Russia and the deterioration of Napoleon's bond with Czar Alexander I was brought about in a huge way by flouting of the Continental System's dictates.
The Russo-Ottoman War (1806-1812) comes in for a surprising amount of analysis. The relationship between the Ottomans and Napoleon is an interesting one, as Sultan Mahmud II often seems unsure if France or Russia pose the bigger long-term challenge to the empire. In addition to this, this six year war is looked at within the context of how it stressed Russia's military capacities prior to Napoleon's ill-advised invasion.
The book reads at times like the recounting of a chess match.
Diplomats like Austria's Klemens von Metternich are at the top of their game, and France's Charles-Maurice Talleyrand appears (justifiably so) quite duplicitous as Napoleon's prospects dim. The book rolls through the stories of seven anti-Napoleonic alliances, with British Prime Ministers William Pitt the Younger and William Greenville piecing together European nations into continental bulwarks against Napoleon's ambitions. The adoption of balance of power politics, which would by and large hold through 1914, were a major impact of this era's conflicts.
Discussion of Napoleon's love life is almost nonexistent; mentions of Marie Louise only come within the context of her familial relation to the Austrian emperor. There is surprisingly little in-depth analysis of Napoleon's marshals, as Jean-de-Dieu Soult and Michel Ney show up in battles but do not have their back stories deeply delved into. The Napoleonic conflicts' global ramifications and the grand strategies of France and their enemies constitute ninety-percent plus of the content.
Alexander Mikerabidze came close to drowning the story in its own weight. There are simply so many different balls in the air-from the Mughal Empire in India to the Seminole Indians in Spain's Florida territory-that some portions become a bit confusing. But this is all done in the service of demonstrating just how far reaching the fallout from Napoleon's invasions reached, and in this respect the book checks off its objective.
Because of this, readers who have read biographies of Napoleon or books focusing on battles like Leipzig or Waterloo will still find plenty to mine in The Napoleonic Wars. It provides a fresh perspective in the sense that overlooked elements of this era are placed front and center in various portions of the narrative.
There is a lot to unpack and a lot of subplots in this work of nonfiction, but the whole creates a sum better than any individual part. Students of the Napoleonic era will get a lot out of this book, and even those with deep knowledge of it are likely to learn something new by absorbing what it has to convey.
-Andrew Canfield Denver, Colorado
November 21, 2020
It's difficult to rate this book. It's such an achievement to write something readable that covers such a huge span of time and geography, tied nicely together, in relatively few pages for all there is to cram in. It *is* readable. And the author delivered on the thing I most wanted from this book, which is to understand the relationships between events happening around the world at the same time.
The book covers France and Europe first and foremost, but also events in Asia,
the Middle East, the Caucasus, South Africa, South America, and North America - tying together events that are known, but that I hadn't comprehended for their relationships to the Napoleonic Wars.
It also lags in places, and occasionally verges on the biblical in its style - lists of names and places and times, with little other narrative. That is thankfully only in a few places, but those were the times I found it most difficult to make progress.
Regardless - I recommend it.
The book covers France and Europe first and foremost, but also events in Asia,
the Middle East, the Caucasus, South Africa, South America, and North America - tying together events that are known, but that I hadn't comprehended for their relationships to the Napoleonic Wars.
It also lags in places, and occasionally verges on the biblical in its style - lists of names and places and times, with little other narrative. That is thankfully only in a few places, but those were the times I found it most difficult to make progress.
Regardless - I recommend it.
March 29, 2022
I have been a Napoleonic enthusiast since I was 13, but never realized the impact these events had on the entire world until I read this book. The book covers an extensive amount of ground, yet accomplishes an intriguing outlook on the famous European conflict and the ramifications it had on the rest of the world.
The book is however primarily concerned with political, social, and economic history. I do not recommend it to readers looking for military histories of the battles and campaigns. Nevertheless, although a military history enthusiast myself, I still appreciated the history featured in the book.
This book was one of those history books that reminds readers of the difference between history and historiography. If Winston Churchill was correct to refer to the Seven Years War as WWI, then the Napoleonic Wars were indeed by the same criteria WWII!
The book is however primarily concerned with political, social, and economic history. I do not recommend it to readers looking for military histories of the battles and campaigns. Nevertheless, although a military history enthusiast myself, I still appreciated the history featured in the book.
This book was one of those history books that reminds readers of the difference between history and historiography. If Winston Churchill was correct to refer to the Seven Years War as WWI, then the Napoleonic Wars were indeed by the same criteria WWII!
March 16, 2022
Perhaps this book is much better if you already have familiarity with the Napoleonic Wars and are looking for a broader view.
For a novice like myself, the book was just *too* broad. Because the author wants to tell the story of every single conflict on the globe during that time period, it all gets kind of hard to follow.
An example: about 65% of the way through, in a section on the Ottoman Empire, he says “this situation changed after Waterloo and the end of the Napoleonic Wars”. But Waterloo doesn’t get talked about for another few hundred pages. Just too hard to follow for a non-historian.
For a novice like myself, the book was just *too* broad. Because the author wants to tell the story of every single conflict on the globe during that time period, it all gets kind of hard to follow.
An example: about 65% of the way through, in a section on the Ottoman Empire, he says “this situation changed after Waterloo and the end of the Napoleonic Wars”. But Waterloo doesn’t get talked about for another few hundred pages. Just too hard to follow for a non-historian.
February 9, 2023
Estamos ante la primera historia global de las guerras napoleónicas que cubre todos los ámbitos, desde los militares, los políticos, los geopolíticos y hasta sociales. Una obra monumental acorde con los nuevos estudios modernos de la guerra.
RESEÑA COMPLETA: https://atrapadaenunashojasdepapel.bl...
RESEÑA COMPLETA: https://atrapadaenunashojasdepapel.bl...
Displaying 1 - 30 of 111 reviews