A couple months ago, I visited a used bookstore. Now, when I visit used bookstores, I go in with no list and an open mind. (On this occasion, that led to buying a dozen books!) One of the books I bought was Andrew Roberts’ Napoleon and Wellington. It examines their rise and their mutual interaction.
As a piece of history, it is exceptionally well researched and judiciously written. Roberts challenges many of the prevailing notions of Waterloo scholarship, such as the emphasis on the differences between the two men. That emphasis makes Napoleon and Wellington into polar opposites, rival geniuses inexorably drawn to a final conflict. While there are many differences between the two great generals, there are also many similarities, like their self confidence in their own intellectual superiority over all their opponents. Both men were born the same year, 1769. Both rose to power through nepotism. Both received their early education at elite French schools. While it is equally a mistake to overemphasize their similarities, Roberts makes a very solid case that they shared as much in common as might be expected of any two brilliant generals of western Europe.
Reading the book as an American provided a lot of insight into our own war of 1812. The British had been fighting Napoleon and France, and all of Napoleon’s mercenaries, from the early 1800s. Napoleon’s thirst of conquest led him to institute the Continental System, under which he forbade all of Europe (which was largely his bruised and unwilling allies) to trade with Great Britain. Portugal’s foreign trade was about 50% British, which led the Portuguese to forget Napoleon’s edict. Napoleon did not forget, and he sent an army in to see that they behaved. The British responded by sending troops to the Iberian peninsula.
The British government was split between antiwar Whigs and pro-war Tories. The Whigs believed Napoleon’s claim of spreading democracy and freedom, overseen, of course, by the one man with sufficient bandwidth to achieve such egalitarian dreams. The Tories (Wellington was a Tory) asserted that Napoleon was a threat to mankind. An earlier Whig named Edmund Burke had opposed war with America during the Revolution, though his denunciation of the French Revolution caused him to fall from favor in his party. The French helped us fight the British, and Napoleon sold us the Louisiana purchase. All that added up to Americans being pretty sympathetic to France.
In desperation, or perhaps convenience, the British seized American nationals who they said were still British to serve on their ships against the French. (Though, to be entirely fair, the French weren’t above grabbing an American sailor every now and then either.) America responded with an embargo when Britain was already battling a European embargo. The British were naturally incensed. When we declared war on them a few years later, they were still fighting the French, though they found enough troops to go and burn Washington, D.C.
I was faintly aware that the British were already fighting a war when we declared war on them, but I hadn’t put the whole Napoleonic wars into the context. Reading Napoleon and Wellington provided that global perspective, as well as making me feel like I understand the characters of Napoleon and Wellington.
If ever bored or searching for a fascinating historical read, pick up Napoleon and Wellington.
Dusty Trails 