“What was it really like to fight for Napoleon? How does the reality compare to the legend?”
By Dr. Bernard Wilkin
THE GRANDE ARMÉE is surrounded by enduring myths. Beautifully-dressed guardsmen are often seen among reenactors or on the silver screen. Screaming “merde!” before the final volley at the end of the Battle of Waterloo, French soldiers are the tragic figures of an odyssey going from Madrid to Moscow. But what was it really like to fight for Napoleon? How does the reality compare to the legend?
For the Emperor (Not France)
Most men felt strongly connected to their region, such as Normandy or Provence, but not to France as a country. When describing for what reasons they fought, soldiers almost always mentioned the Emperor as the main cause. His presence on the battlefield or a chance encounter was always an electrifying moment for the rank and file.
Gambling Your Fate
Conscription was introduced during the French Republic, but was perfected under Napoleon. Chance decided who went to serve in the army. At least once a year, all men aged 20 to 25 would gather to draw a number. Those dealt the lowest digits would automatically go while the others were placed in the reserve.
“This is a Rag”
Once in the army, most conscripts were eager to receive their first uniform. Far from the beautiful illustrations seen in historical books and magazines, the gear that was issued was usually dirty and filled with holes.
“Is that edible?”
Forget gourmet French cuisine – the food was usually pretty bad in Bonaparte’s army. The bread was dry while the meat was often rotten and infested with worms. French soldiers often had to forage or pay out-of-pocket to supplement their meagre diets.
“Je t’aime, mon amour”
Love stories and sexual encounters were frequent among soldiers the French army. Young infantrymen, many of whom were far from their Catholic households for the first time, frequently found girlfriends in the occupied countries. Others paid prostitutes for sex. Many recorded the sordid details in their personal correspondence.
“Hey, There’s a Smelly Hussar in My Bed”
French soldiers didn’t sleep on the floor but in beds provided by the army. Unfortunately, the French military forced men to share them. Unpleasant at first, the bedfellow practice often triggered strong friendships in the long-term. Unfortunately, living in such close quarters also helped vermin like Typhus carrying lice to spread disease. One such epidemic decimated the Grande Armée as it marched into Russia in 1812.
“Is it Grouchy?”
Surviving first-hand accounts of battles of the Napoleonic era are frequently inaccurate. Despite fighting on the front lines in some of history’s most famous clashes, most French soldiers had no clue of what was happening on the battlefield. The situation was too messy for them and they had a difficult time narrating these events to their families.
No Hang Ups About Killing
French soldiers didn’t have 21st Century morale compasses. According to their own accounts, it wasn’t ethically difficult for them to kill enemy soldiers and civilians. Many even bragged about executing women and children.
“It’s Just a Scratch”
French military hospitals were dreadful places. Despite the contributions to battlefield medicine made by French army surgeons like Baron Dominique Jean Larrey, Napoleon himself cared little about his army’s medical corps and looked upon it as a dispensable service. Soldiers often described battlefield hospitals as little more than places to die, and not without reason. The odds of surviving a close brush with 19th Century army sawbones were long indeed.
The English Aren’t That Bad
French soldiers captured and shipped to England as prisoners of war complained about the food and the weather, but many recalled the British as compassionate people.
You can find more amazing facts and hundreds of letters of French conscripts from 1799 to 1815 in my newly released book Fighting for Napoleon (Pen and Sword, 2015).
(This article was originally published on MilitaryHistoryNow.com on Nov. 11, 2015)
Dr. Bernard Wilkin is a military historian working as Lecturer in the History Department at the University of Exeter. He is the author of the book Fighting for Napoleon (Pen and Sword) and several academic articles on military history from 1799 to 1945. He can be contacted on twitter: @bernardwilkin
This is a terrible article, sloppy and clearly biased against the French. No context is given that would demonstrate that all of this was the norm for European armies at the time, nor that France was forced to stretch its resources to defend itself against the hostile forces of monarchist Europe. And why bring up England? British forces hardly ever met the French before 1815, and French troops hardly ever suffered capture before 1812, never to the English until 1815. This is classic cherry picking. This is not history but an exercise in British chauvinism.
Naprosto nesouhlasím s tvrzením, že Francouzští vojáci bojovali pouze za Napoleona! Tento článek opomíjí to zásadní, a tím je ta skutečnost, že Francie se od vzniku revoluce musela bránit řadě koalicí evropských monarchií vedených Anglií, které byly agresory a jejichž cílem bylo dosadit do Francie zpět sesazené Bourbony. Napoleon, coby geniální vojevůdce a politik, se stal symbolem tohoto obranného boje obhajujícího to, čeho revoluce dosáhla, a to především toho, že z poddaných se stali občané sobě rovní. To byla noční můra tehdejších evropských absolutistických monarchů – krom Anglie – té šlo o ohrožení jejich obchodních zájmů dravou francouzskou buržoazií. Až do Wagramu vedla francouzská armáda, a to i pod Napoleonem, obraný boj, kdy další a další koalice vytvářené Anglií vedly proti Francii útočnou válku. K tomuto obranému boji se dá zpočátku počítat i válka ve Španělsku. Je typickým zkreslením nazývat tyto nekončící útoky na Francii 1789 – 1810 Napoleonskými válkami. Byly to především války různých útočných koalic proti Francii, jejichž průběh ve prospěch Francie (do roku 1810) ovlivňoval vojenský génius Napoleon Bonaparte, později císař Francouzů. Ne samozvaný, ale zvolený v národním plebiscitu. Pokud byl v Evropě v té době nějaký samozvaný císař, pak to byl jednoznačně císař rakouský František!!
I completely disagree with the claim that the French soldiers only fought for Napoleon! This article ignores the crucial fact, and that is the fact that since the beginning of the revolution, France has had to defend itself against a number of aggressive coalitions of the European monarchies led by England, which aimed to replace the deposed Bourbons in France. Napoleon, as a brilliant military leader and politician, became a symbol of this defensive struggle defending what the revolution had achieved, especially the fact that the subjects became citizens equal. This was the nightmare of the then European absolutist monarchs – apart from England – which threatened their business interests by the predatory French bourgeoisie. Up to Wagram, the French army, even under Napoleon, fought a defensive battle, with more and more coalitions formed by England waging an offensive war against France. At first, the war in Spain can be counted on this defensive struggle. It is a typical distortion to call these endless attacks on France 1789-1810 the Napoleonic Wars. It was mainly the wars of various assault coalitions against France, whose course in favor of France (until 1810) was influenced by the military genius Napoleon Bonaparte, later the French emperor. Not self-proclaimed, but elected in the national plebiscite. If there was a self-proclaimed emperor in Europe at that time, then it was clearly the Austrian Emperor Francis !!
Oh I quite agree England faught an offensive war againt poor old Napoleon in Spain, and he was only defending France when defeated at Wateroo. Not to mention the retreat from Moscow etc.
Often when reading articles about Napoleon in English, you naturally have to beware of bias. This article is heavily biased in favour of an English position. Much of this article can be applied to ALL of Europe if not the world during the 18th and 19th centuries.
In wars, civilians are actually at a greater loss of life than army personnel suffer. Unfortunately, statistic of civilian deaths and displacement are hard to quantify, but entire towns and hamlets were destroyed, farmers lands plundered and destroyed, etc.
As for Spain, when Napoleon removed the Bourbon King, who was an ally of France and even with Napoleon. The Spanish People, led by the Catholic Clergy to attack French outposts, guardsmen, patrols etc. created havoc in the French Army. The French retaliation was predictable if not honorable. Some of Napoleon’s Marshalls treated the Spanish better such as Suchet
During this period, Navy personnel, except for the officers, generally had no uniforms. Barefoot was common as climbing ropes was easier with barefeet to feel the ropes better.
Going back to the American Revolution, John Paul Jones, wore a British uniform, in his captured ship the Serapis, sailed it to Amsterdam, then sailed right through the heavily patrolled English Channel wearing a British Captains uniform while his sailors, including freed African slaves, free Blacks, French, Spanish, Native Americans, all of whom wore anything they to find. Since it was a British warship, all Jones had to do was hoist a Union Jack, a common practice amongst Pirates and it worked famously. Jones was born in Scotland and had a Scottish accent which made him perfect for a ‘False Flag’ manuever.
So the common warrior of the time period was lucky to have a uniform and if it was dirty and worn it was better than nothing. European armies, in general, were better outfitted than sailors of the age.