Reddit reviews The Campaigns of Napoleon

Generally, when feudalism faded away, the nobility found a place in the bureaucracy. Many nations had limitations to positions that allowed only nobility to fill such spots. In France, most officers, if not all, were nobility as a commoner could only reach the rank of Sergeant Major in the army of the Ancient Regime. In Britain, officers and the wealthier merchant class could afford to buy a comission in the Army. The Prussian military also had the same model as the French, with officers ranks being for the junkers.[^[1]](http://www.amazon.com/War-Austrian-Succession-Reed-Browning/dp/0312125615/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1382668090&sr=1-1&keywords=the+war+of+the+austrian+succession "'The War of the Austrian Succession' by Reed Browning (1993)") And in Russia, nobility could serve in Guard regiments before transfering out to leadership positions in the Russian Army,[^[2]](http://www.amazon.com/History-Russia-Vol-European-Eurasian/dp/1843310236/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1382668479&sr=8-1&keywords=A+History+of+Russia+Volume+I "'A History of Russia: Volume I To 1917" by Walter G. Moss (2005)") although if I remember, there were not the same restrictions of rank for promotion, just literacy, but before the Napoleonic Wars, it was practically the same.

This changed with the French Revolution changed everything in France. As a result of it, nobility was abolished and all positions were available to the masses, but the rich still dominated due to literacy levels. However, most of the military leadership consisted of qualified and experienced people after 1796. When Napoleon came to power, he continued the reforms and even with the creation of the Empire and the return of noble titles, a lowly private could find himself a baron (victory titles didn't come with land but with a pension paid by the state to ensure a noble life style). Some of Napoleons 's best commanders came from nothing: Bessiers was the son of a surgeon, Ney was the son of a Barrel cooper, Massena was a smuggler, Agareau served in at least three armies before the Revolution, and Murat was destined to be a Priest.[^[3]](http://www.amazon.com/March-Twenty-Six-Sword-Military-Classics/dp/1844150976/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1382668453&sr=1-1&keywords=The+March+of+the+TWenty+Six "March of the Twenty-Six" by R. F. Delderfield (1962)")

After Napoleon abdicated to Louis XVIII, Louis tried to bring France back to it's pre Revolution days. He sold officers commissions and the coveted Legion of Honor to anyone with the money. After having a meritocratic country under the Revolution and Empire, people grumbled. When Napoleon returned from Elba, people were happy to see him, hoping that he'll return France to what it was. Before though, people were tired of the war and happy when he resigned, hoping for peace. Now, they couldn't stand the Bourbon 'king' placed there by the foreign powers.[^[4]](http://www.amazon.com/Contesting-French-Revolution-Paul-Hanson/dp/1405160845/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1382668487&sr=8-1&keywords=Contesting+the+French+Revolution "Contesting The French Revolution" by Paul R. Hanson (2009)") [^[5]](http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/swords-around-a-throne-john-r-elting/1100624204?ean=9780306807572 "'Swords Around A Throne' by John R. Elting (1997)")
[^[6]](http://www.amazon.com/The-Campaigns-Napoleon-David-Chandler/dp/0025236601/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1382579275&sr=8-1&keywords=Campaigns+of+Napoleon "'The Campaigns of Napoleon' by David Chandler (1966)")

Napoleon lost but the hope never died. Charles X, successor to Louis, abdicated during the Revolution of 1830 to Louis Philippe, the Citizen King, whom was supposed to make things better. However, in the end it didn't work and the people revolted again in 1848, sparking the Revolutions of 1848, and creating the Second Republic.

Overall, the nobility served as a source of able workers for the bureaucracy and the people were tired if the privilege of the nobility.

Edited for proper sourcing.

Because he won. A lot.

If you want to look at the big one (Amongst many):

The Battle of Austerlitz is one of the most important battles in western history, for instance.

I think part of it is also what his opponents did after his fall, too. They magnified his successes. The Duke of Wellington famously stated that Napoleon was the greatest general in history, and therefore implied that he himself was better, since he defeated Napoleon at Waterloo.

If you want to read a book, the standard is David Chandler's The Campaigns of Napoleon.

Off the top of my head, The Campaigns of Napoleon by David Chandler, is a monster. But its also one of the best surveys of Napoleon's campaigns.

David Chandler, CAMPAIGNS OF NAPOLEON. Still best comprehensive military history.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Campaigns-Napoleon-David-Chandler/dp/0025236601

This is a huge period of time, early modern and modern.

The 16th century is defined by religious wars, as is the first half of the 17th. I'm not sure of a good source on the Peasant Wars and such but I do know the absolute megalith you should get for the 30 Years' War (1618-1648) which is honestly the most important thing you could possibly study between 1492 - 1815 (the Early Modern Era traditionally). Yes, even more than the Napoleonic Wars. The greatest volume I've found on this is The Thirty Years' War: Europe's Tragedy by Peter Wilson.

I can not emphasize this enough: I know many people who consider the Early Modern Era to start in 1648 because of how fucking important the conclusion of this war was and what this war represented. It was the last religious war in Europe, it absolutely obliterated political lines and changed everything forever. It harkened the downfall of the top dogs at the time of Sweden, Poland, the Hapsburgs, the Ottomans, and Spain. This is a fucking important war.

Another great war on probably the most tumultuous area of the Early Modern Era is The Northern Wars: War, State and Society in Northeastern Europe, 1558 - 1721 by Robert Frost. If you want a book (that is pricey as shit) on arguably the most important man of the Early Modern Era and who brought France into greatness and basically started Absolutism I'd check out The Wars of Louis XIV: 1667 - 1714.

In terms of the Napoleonic Wars...well...it's a fucking hard topic to cover. There's not a lot of good general histories out there. I'll page /u/DonaldFDraper and ask him to come in if he has anything particular he'd like to recommend but preemptively I'll recommend Bayonets of the Republic: Motivation And Tactics In The Army Of Revolutionary France, 1791-94 written by that same dude who wrote the Wars of Louix XIV. Ultimately you can't separate the military history from the Napoleonic period very easily so you're going to get a bit of both whether you like it or not (but I hope you do! It's a great period of study w.r.t. military history). While I haven't read it I have heard French Society in Revolution, 1789-1799 by David Andress is a good read. However my principal source on the Napoleonic Wars is The Campaigns of Napoleon by David Chandler. Yeah it's expensive, go find it cheap (or free) if you can online (because it does exist, found it before I actually buckled down and bought it) but it is the source on Napoleon. This should be the last book you get though and only if this period becomes a fascination with you.

After that I'd recommend The Franco-Prussian War: The German Invasion of France 1870-1871 by Michael Howard and to help dispel some myths and give a general overview of the common perceptions of WWI The Great War: Myth and Memory by Dan Todman. If you want an overview of events leading up to the war along with the opening year or so I'd recommend the absolute megalith The First World War: Volume I: To Arms by Hew Strachan. This is the book you should get on your introduction to the First World War along with Myth and Memory. Read this one first though.

https://www.amazon.ca/Campaigns-Napoleon-David-G-Chandler/dp/0025236601

Knowledge makes it valuable.