re: Napoleon

quote:

---

What separated him from other general's on the battlefield? I'm curious...

---

It's been pointed out that he is the "father of modern military organization" and that is true. The full meaning of that phrase covers lots of ground. When we think of an army composed of Corps, and then each Corps containing Divisions and Divisions containing a couple of Brigades, we are thinking of the military organization of an army as Napoleon designed it. This is only one innovation of Napoleon.

Napoleon's influence on strategy entails his development of a strategic mode of maneuver through which an army could maneuver with maximum and quick striking power. Each of four corps marching within one day (max) supporting distance of one another. Whichever corps might find the enemy army first is strong enough to deploy and defend itself for a day. Meanwhile, the other three corps are fully informed of the enemy's whereabouts and the non engaged three corps are maneuvering to pin the enemy in the front and to march to the enemy's flank or rear to deliver a decisive blow. In the year 1790, this was unorthodox and very innovative. It was something that nobody else in Europe or America were practicing.

As for tactical maneuver on the battlefield itself, Napoleon's innovations were decisively important. No other army in Europe or America had developed a tactical system in which individual battalions could advance rapidly on the battlefield in a formation colloquially called an "attack column". This formation had the training and capability to rapidly meet a battlefield need, a gap in the line, for example. This battalion could then rapidly deploy into a battle line formation, and then, once it could again advance, it could rapidly PLOY back into attack column and move forward on the battlefield. If enemy cavalry threatened, the battalion could form Square with great speed, because it was an exceptionally well-trained battalion.

The other European and American armies could not do this during the time of 1790 to 1807. These armies did not have maneuver battalions in Napoleon's sense of the term. These armies were still wedded somewhat to the linear-style of tactics seen during the 1760s for Frederick the Great's wars. Until his enemies adopted his methods, the enemy's armies were organized and deployed into very large parts called "columns" which were about the size of a large Napoleonic Corps. But, these columns were established as an exigency on the eve of a campaign or battle. They would never have trained together on maneuvers as part of a larger army. Napoleon's Corps, Divisions, Brigades, Regiments and Battalions were very well trained and drilled on Army-level maneuvers.

Promotions and commands awarded on the basis of merit rather than based on Royalty was in innovation already mentioned. Of course the American Army was already doing this in 1775, but Napoleon's European enemies were not.

So, this question of: What exactly made Napoleon better than his contemporaries? is a question that has a long and complex answer. But the fact is, Englishmen and Americans, by and large, have absolutely no interest in learning about how some faggy, cuck, midget Frenchy could be such a great military mind.

So, because of that, we have Ridley Scott's movie: Napoleon.