Shortly after the tragic death of the duc d’Enghien, on the 21st March, 1804, Napoleon, then first consul for life, took measures to induce the French senate to propose his elevation to the Imperial dignity. With the senate he found no difficulty. On the 18th May, that subservient body declared him Emperor of the French. With regard to his wish to make the title hereditary, he had recourse to a plebiscite, the result of which was an overwhelming majority in his favour. On the 2nd December, 1804, he was crowned, or rather crowned himself, amidst a scene of unrivalled pomp, surrounded by a brilliant court and by the marshals whom he had recently appointed. The Pope himself had been induced, or compelled, to attend the ceremony and confer his benediction on the new sovereign.

If this revival of the sovereignty was received with resignation, rather than with enthusiasm, by the bulk of the populace, such was not the case with the army. It was by his matchless military talents, and by the brilliant victories to which he had so often led the soldiers of the republic, that Napoleon had became their idol and, with them at his back, had risen from a humble lieutenant of artillery to be the greatest personality in France and in Europe.

It was as much by the necessity for retaining the favour of the army as by his own boundless ambition, and his schemes for an universal empire, that the Emperor was impelled to enter upon a continued career of conquest. His designs he cloaked by pretended overtures to England, with whom he had been again at war since May, 1803. He neither believed nor hoped that peace would follow, but the negotiations served to reveal to him the existence of an alliance between England and Russia. Austria too, he knew, was labouring to repair the losses she had suffered in recent campaigns. Prussia, confident in the strength of an army which was believed to be as invincible as those of the great Frederick, was bent on playing her own game rather than that of Europe generally. She offered a splendid opportunity for the exercise of the diplomatic talents of Talleyrand and his master who soon saw that, by judicious treatment, she could be kept out of the field, until it was too late for her to enter it with powerful allies.

Whether Napoleon really ever intended seriously to attempt the invasion of England or not, his avowed intentions enabled him to train, on his northern coasts, the finest army he ever commanded. At that distance, his preparations were far removed from the view of Austria, who little thought that an army collected at a point so remote from her frontier could be used against her with such rapidity and deadly effect as it presently was.

At the same time, the Emperor was busy strengthening himself on his continental frontier. Holland, soon to be erected into a monarchy for bestowal on his brother Louis, was brought under French control. The Italian republic was induced to declare Napoleon king of Italy.

It was now time for him to precipitate matters. His coronation at Milan with the iron crown of Lombardy, the incorporation of the republics of Genoa and Lucca, as well as other northern Italian states, his military celebration on the field of Marengo, were so many insults calculated to excite the anger and the fear of Austria. It was on Austria that the Emperor had resolved to fall first. In August, 1805, that power joined the coalition of England and Russia. To them was added Sweden. Prussia alone, refusing to join them, allowed herself to be led astray by the bait of Hanover which she coveted, and which Napoleon insidiously dangled before her greedy eyes. He had already occupied it in pursuance of his war with England. On his south-western frontier, his alliance with Spain and Portugal left him free from anxiety.

In the end of July, 1805, Sir R. Calder’s naval action convinced Napoleon that all hope of an invasion of England was, for the present, at an end. He had no longer any motive for delaying his meditated attack on Austria.

That power, which had long seen that war was inevitable sooner or later, hoping to steal a march on her wakeful adversary whilst he was occupied with his schemes for the invasion of England, moved, early in September, into Bavaria, a state allied to France. In doing so she, notwithstanding her previous experience of him, underrated Napoleon and, moreover, moved at least two months before she could expect the arrival of the Russian army advancing to her assistance. The Emperor’s decision to hurl upon Austria the army of England was taken at once. Every necessary order for the march from Boulogne to the Danube had already been prepared. It was executed with unparalleled rapidity and exactness. On the l0th October, the unhappy Austrian general Mack, surrounded in Ulm by the French, capitulated with 30,000 men, all that remained under his command of the 80,000 with whom he had invaded Bavaria six weeks before. The very next day, Napoleon’s power at sea was for ever destroyed by Nelson at Trafalgar. A few days later, the Austrian forces in Italy, under the Archduke Charles, were compelled to retreat before Masséna in the hope of covering Vienna, now threatened by Napoleon’s advance. Negotiations for an armistice failed, owing to Napoleon’s excessive demands.

Prussia had, at last, come to a sense of the false position she was occupying. She attempted no resistance to the invasion of Hanover, now almost entirely clear of French soldiers, by the allied troops of Russia, Sweden, and England. The Prussian cabinet had taken offence at the violation of Anspach territory, by the march through it of French troops on their way to the Danube. So strong was the feeling against France that Duroc, Napoleon’s ambassador, left Berlin whilst the King and the Tsar, who had arrived there, solemnly swore to rearrange Europe on the lines of the treaty of Luneville. Haugwitz was despatched to inform Napoleon of this intention and, in the event of its non-acceptance by him, to declare war against him on the part of Prussia. On the 15th December, Prussia had decided on a course which, if she had followed it two months earlier, placed as she was on the flank of the line of march from Boulogne to the Danube, would have frustrated the Emperor’s whole plan. Whilst she was making up her mind to an honest course, Napoleon had entered Vienna, had moved to Brünn, and had finally, on the anniversary of his coronation, inflicted on the Austrians and their Russian allies the decisive defeat of Austerlitz. Haugwitz, arriving at the French headquarters with the Prussian ultimatum in his pocket, was put off till after the impending battle. Its result caused him to take a very different course, to suppress the ultimatum, the terms of which Napoleon could guess, to offer Prussia’s congratulations on the victory, and to conclude a disgraceful treaty by which his master bartered the honour of Prussia for the cession of Hanover.

Austria defeated, not crushed, agreed to the terms of the treaty of Presburg, to cede territory to Italy and to Bavaria, to pay an indemnity, to recognise the recent changes in Italy, and the elevation of Bavaria and Wurtemberg from electorates to kingdoms.

Everything prospered for Napoleon. The allied invaders withdrew from Hanover; Naples, attacked by the French, shortly came under the rule of Joseph Buonaparte.

Having disposed, for the time being, of Austria, the Emperor turned upon Prussia. He had always intended to do so; her perfidious conduct had rendered him more determined than ever to destroy her. He could not trust her, even had he wished to. Prussia had embroiled herself with England by accepting from Napoleon the cession of Hanover. Under pretext of defending his new ally against Great Britain, he heaped insults on her, the last being the creation of the Confederation of the Rhine as a standing threat against her, and a great base for French operations, whether against Prussia or against Austria.

After Austerlitz, the Russian troops had retired; but the Tsar had not been a party to the negotiations at Presburg, and his hand was still free. Negotiations between Napoleon and Russia and England, during the early months of 1806, broke down. Prussia had been lashed to fury by the discovery that Napoleon had attempted to bribe England with Hanover, which he had so recently ceded to Prussia.

Wishing to strike her before succour could reach her from distant Russia, the Emperor anticipated her ultimatum by marching against her towards the Elbe.

The ultimatum reached Napoleon on the 7th October, 1806; seven days later the Prussian army had been destroyed at the fatal double battle of Jena and Auerstädt. The broken remnants were pursued to the Baltic by Soult, Murat, Bernadotte, and Lannes. Blücher was driven northwards to the Danish frontier, where he surrendered with the last of his force. Magdeburg, with a large garrison, capitulated to Ney on the 8th November; Hanover was occupied by an army under Louis Buonaparte from Holland; Saxony, detached from the Prussian alliance, was eventually attached (12th December) to that of Napoleon. The Saxon Elector’s alliance was cemented by his promotion to a kingdom. No considerable organised hostile force remained to confront the Emperor west of the Oder. A small fraction, all that remained to the King of the Prussian army, alone succeeded in retiring to the Vistula and East Prussia. The Russians were still far off to the east of the Vistula when, on the 26th October, 1806, Napoleon, preceded on the 24th by Davout, the victor of Auerstädt, entered Berlin in triumph.

In less than a year he had disastrously defeated Austria, had forced the Russian army to retreat, and had absolutely broken the power of Prussia. In all Europe there remained but two substantial bulwarks against the tide of French aggression – Russia and England.

Against the latter, at sea, the Emperor, since the battle of Trafalgar, had been powerless. To ruin her, as he thought possible, in her commerce, he, on the 21st November, issued from Berlin his famous decree declaring the British islands in a state of blockade and all English subjects, who might be found in the countries under his control, prisoners of war. British merchandise in those countries was confiscated, and all entry of English vessels into continental ports was prohibited. Much as has been said against the Berlin decree, it must always be remembered that it recited some principles, such as the necessity for a blockade being efficient in order to be valid, which have since been accepted by most of the civilised powers. Napoleon did not pretend to carry out these principles. His argument was that, as Britain refused to admit them, she must be compelled to do so by other methods.

Napoleon’s position at Berlin was this. He was in effective occupation of the whole of Northern Europe as far as Berlin, his rear was safe owing to his alliance with Spain and Portugal. In front of him, at a great distance still, were the armies of Russia which had, in the first instance, been designed only to support, as auxiliaries, the great army of Prussia, now destroyed. Henceforth they were to bear the whole brunt of Napoleon’s onslaught.

His right flank, as he advanced against the Russians, would be threatened by Austria, who, humiliated and sorely wounded by the previous year’s campaign, was yet far from being a negligeable quantity. Her finances were crippled, but, if she threw in her lot with England and Russia, she might well hope for pecuniary assistance from the former.[1] The Archduke Charles was reorganising the army, and had already collected a considerable force in Bohemia and Silesia.

If Austria should, however, decide to renew the struggle, she would still have to reckon with the army which Napoleon maintained in Northern Italy after the conquest of Naples.[2] That army, as it was drained of the best French troops for employment in Germany, consisted, no doubt, largely of inferior troops. Nevertheless, it was a power to be considered, and Austria would be bound to defend her southern frontiers with at least 80,000 or 100,000 men.

Napoleon’s left flank in Germany, and his rear in France, were, now that the control of the sea had passed to England, open to a descent by the English, the Swedes, and the Russians, on the coasts of France, Holland, and Germany. The Swedes held a footing on the German shore in Stralsund and Swedish Pomerania. It was hardly likely at any time that a descent would be attempted in France; it became more and more unlikely, as the Emperor succeeded in his advance towards Russia. The utmost expeditionary force which Napoleon considered England capable of landing was about 25,000 men.[3] The attempt on Holland, in 1799, by England and Russia, had not had an encouraging success. The danger to the French left and rear was distinctly less than was to be apprehended from a renewal of the war by Austria. The fear of this last eventuality hung perpetually, during the wars of 1806-7, like the sword of Damocles, over the head of Napoleon.[4] His correspondence teems with references to the subject, and much of the negotiations which he carried on, during the latter part of the campaign, was mainly with a view to avoid giving offence to Austria, whose mediation had been offered. On the 26th October [5] he inquires, through his ambassador at Vienna, as to the truth of reports that the Archduke Charles was collecting 80,000 men at Prague. If so, a remonstrance is to be addressed to the Austrian Court, which is to be told that such measures are unnecessary for maintenance of the neutrality promised by it. On the 4th November, [6] he writes to Eugène Beauharnais, explaining how he intends to place at the disposal of the Viceroy 60,000 men, including Marmont’s corps in Dalmatia. That, he thinks, should suffice to detain 100,000 Austrian troops on the southern frontier, should that power sufficiently recover from its alarm at the fate of Prussia to assume a hostile attitude. Eugène is to be ready to take the field on the 1st December. To his brother Joseph the Emperor writes, on the same date, in similar terms,[7] remarking that Austria appears to be arming under pretext of assuring her safety as a neutral. On the 7th November,[8] he again desires that the Emperor of Austria be informed that his neutrality only is required, not his active alliance, but that Napoleon cannot view with equanimity the collection of 60,000 or 80,000 men on his flank, or regard such action as evincing a genuine desire to maintain neutrality. On the 14th March, 1807,[9] he writes that he already has 80,000 men in Italy, and hopes shortly to have 90,000. This should fully occupy 120,000 Austrians. He would really prefer the alliance of Russia to that of Austria, but with the latter he wants peace. On the 19th and 20th of the same month [10] he instructs Talleyrand to inform Austria that her conduct has necessitated the increase which he is making to his forces, and to say, unofficially, that Austrian mediation can be considered only on condition of her abstention from arming. He adds that he suspects Russia of endeavouring to draw Austria into the coalition. On the 9th April [11] he calls Talleyrand’s attention to a suspicious correspondence between the Russian general Essen and the Austrian cordon on the Gallician frontier. On the 16th [12] he agrees to accept the offer of mediation tendered by the Austrian Emperor. On the 30th May [13] he writes to Brune, now commanding the army of observation in Germany, pointing out that, should Austria move, that marshal would be able to meet her with 60,000 men of his own army, reinforced by 20,000 Poles and 20,000 men, under Jerome Buonaparte, in Silesia.

These references suffice to show how constantly Napoleon was harassed by the dread of an Austrian intervention, and the means by which he sought to prevent or defeat it.

He saw, from Berlin, in front of him the Russian armies – now preparing to meet him as his principal adversary. He felt that, until he could gain over or crush the great Northern power, he could never hope for success in his contest against Great Britain. He would probably have preferred to gain Russia to his side without having to embark on an expedition against her which he himself described as the greatest project which he had ever undertaken.[14] He told Talleyrand, as has just been mentioned, that he would prefer the alliance of Russia to that of Austria. But the former power had been too honourable in her adherence to her engagements to give much hope of her detachment from them, until she had been beaten in the field.

To embarrass her to the utmost, Napoleon sought, successfully, to embroil her with Turkey. He incited Persia also to wage war on her rear. Russia, unfortunately for Europe and herself, fell into the trap; at a time when every available man should have been at liberty to fight against Napoleon, she hampered herself by the detachment of a large army against the Turks.

Throughout the war with the French, the necessity for carrying on this subsidiary war with Turkey was a serious drain on Russian resources, whilst the assistance which Napoleon gave, through Marmont in Dalmatia, to Turkey in no way weakened his power in Germany or Italy.[l5] He promised many things to the Sultan; in the end, he deserted the ally who had served him to such good purpose.

Before closing this brief account of the general political situation in Europe towards the close of 1806, a few words must be said on the subject of Poland.

The three partitions, in the latter half of the preceding century, of the Polish kingdom, had finally resulted in the acquisition by the three partitioning powers of the following shares:

           Square leagues.    Population.
Russia        23,247           5,764,398
Prussia        6,707           2,596,389
Austria        8,296           3,600,000 [16]

The recollection of their former independence, and the hope of its recovery, were strong in the hearts of the Polish people, especially in those of the nobles. They felt that from the three powers which had absorbed them they had no hope. The advent of Napoleon, the effacement of Prussia in the late campaign, and the defeat of Austria in 1805, afforded them grounds of expectation.

No sooner had Napoleon’s armies commenced their eastward progress from Berlin than he was besieged with deputations and petitions from the Poles, setting forth their hopes and urging him to reconstitute the monarchy.[17]

His position in regard to this question was extremely delicate. It was certain that, whatever differences might exist between Russia, Prussia, and Austria on other subjects, they would be unanimous in their opposition to any proposal for the undoing of the partitions of Poland. Prussia’s feelings, in her present abased condition, he could afford to disregard. Austria he could not treat in the same way, for her neutrality was all important to him in his advance against Russia. The latter power he was anxious, when he should have defeated her, to bind to his own side in the struggle against England. When, therefore, the Austrian Cabinet, in reply to his remonstrances on the subject of its assembly of troops in Gallicia, urged the danger of insurrectionary movements in Prussian Poland extending to Gallicia, Napoleon agreed not to allow his incitements of the Poles to be extended to the Austrian portion.[18] At the same time, he sounded that Government on a proposal that it should cede to him its share of Poland in exchange for Prussian territory in Silesia, which had been wrested by Frederick the Great from Maria Theresa.[19] The bait was tempting. To his own honour, and the advantage of Europe, the Emperor of Austria avoided the snare which was designed to embroil him with Prussia.

For the reasons which have above been stated, Napoleon also resolved not to irritate Russia by inciting the Poles subject to her to insurrection, and he, throughout the campaign, restricted his operations in this sense to the Prussian share of Poland.

To the deputations which approached him at Berlin and at Warsaw, he replied vaguely, “France has never recognised the different partitions of Poland; nevertheless, I cannot proclaim your independence until you have decided to defend your rights as a nation with arms in your hands by every sort of sacrifice, even that of life. You have been reproached with having, in your continued civil dissensions, lost sight of the interests of your country. Instructed by your misfortunes, reunite yourselves and prove to the world that one spirit animates the whole Polish nation.”[20]

According to de Fezensac, Napoleon was furious with Murat for forwarding one petition from Warsaw, in which it was prayed that the Polish kingdom might be reconstituted under a French general. The Emperor discerned in it the handiwork of his ambitious brother-in-law, and that he was, doubtless, the French general suggested.[21]

The Emperor’s replies, whilst making no definite promises, were sufficiently encouraging to assure to him the moral and material support of the Poles in the ensuing campaign, and to deprive Prussia of all hope of recruiting her shattered army by voluntary enlistment in Poland. It was, however, most desirable for the Emperor to support the Poles, in their resistance to Prussia, by occupying their territory, especially Warsaw, their ancient capital, and by conferring on their representatives at least a nominal share in the administration of the country.

As soon, therefore, as he was in possession of Warsaw, he constituted a provisional government of seven of the chief nobles. The country was parcelled off into six departments, the boundaries of which were already known.[22] The branches of justice, the interior, finance, war, and police, were assigned to separate members of the government, which voted by majority and was empowered, on the report of the departmental director, to pass necessary laws and orders.[23] In West Prussia, Napoleon had already organised his own government, placing at the head of the civil departments Daru, and at that of the military Clarke.[24]

Silesia was yet unconquered, and its great fortresses remained to be subdued.

Such, briefly, was the situation of Europe in November, 1806. Napoleon, holding all the territory of France, Italy, Holland, and Northern Germany up to the Oder, was in possession of immense resources in men, money, and material. His rear was safe from the direction of Spain, and the garrison left in France was ample to repel any descent likely to be made by England on her coasts. Austria was a danger to his right flank; but, lying, as she did, between the French armies in Germany, and in Northern Italy, and crippled by her recent disasters, she could only intervene at great risk to herself. Sweden was only dangerous as the ally of England, in the event of a descent by sea on the Dutch or German coasts. Turkey was in active alliance with the French.

[1]  Austria’s position was analogous to that which had been occupied by Prussia in the preceding year. By throwing her weight into the scale against the Emperor, if she could not entirely prevent his farther advance for the time being, she could, at any rate, most seriously embarrass him. On the other hard, she felt that a renewal of the war so soon, in violation of the truly of Presburg, would justly expose her to the charge of perfidy, whilst, if defeated again, she could expect nothing short of annihilation at the hands of the incensed Napoleon. To assist Prussia she could hardly feel bound, looking to the selfish and treacherous policy pursued by the North German kingdom in 1805, when Austria was herself in such dire distress. For that conduct the débâcle of Jena seemed to Austria little more than a just retribution. The interests of Europe called Austria again to the breach. She was not unselfish, or farseeing enough to expose herself to the awful risk. [Back to paragraph text]

[2]  This army was entirely separate from that guarding the Neapolitan kingdom. [Back to paragraph text]

[3]  Corr. 12,135. [Back to paragraph text]

[4]  Austria defended her armaments partly on the ground of fear of a fresh French invasion. “Austria took the opportunity to allege fears for her neutrality; as if we had not enough to do with the winter and the Muscovite, she pretended to think that we should pass the gorges of her mountains” (Savary, iii. 2). [Back to paragraph text]

[5]  Corr. 11,088. [Back to paragraph text]

[6]  Corr. 11,172. [Back to paragraph text]

[7]  Corr. 11.173. [Back to paragraph text]

[8]  Corr. 11,194. [Back to paragraph text]

[9]  Corr. 12,028. [Back to paragraph text]

[10]  Corr. 12,028, and 12,098. [Back to paragraph text]

[11]  Corr. 12,333. [Back to paragraph text]

[12]  Corr. 12,391. [Back to paragraph text]

[13]  Corr. 12,704. [Back to paragraph text]

[14]  Corr. 11,292.  Letter to Lacuée, dated 22nd November, 1806. [Back to paragraph text]

[15]  Napoleon (or rather Jomini, Vie de Napoleon, ii. 336) at one time estimated Michelson’s army on the Danube at 80,000, which was certainly in excess of its real strength. Two divisions were presently withdrawn for employment in Poland, and Berthier, writing on the 29th of January, 1807, to Marmont, puts the Russian army of Moldavia at 30,000 (Arch. Hist., Berthier’s correspondence). The prevention of such a number from joining the Russian army in front of him was of the greatest advantage to the Emperor. [Back to paragraph text]

[16]  Wilson, p. 67, note. [Back to paragraph text]

[17]  De Fezensac (p. 125) says that Lannes and Augereau, marching to the left of Posen, found the Polish country-folk far less enthusiastic for revolt against Prussia, and that the movement was mainly supported by the nobles. [Back to paragraph text]

[18]  To Baron de Comeau the Emperor said, “Poland! so much the worse for them! They have allowed themselves to be partitioned. They are no longer a nation, they have no public spirit. The nobles are too much, the people too little. It is a dead body to which life must be restored before making anything of it. I will make soldiers and officers of them; afterwards I will see. I shall take Prussia’s portion. I shall have Posen and Warsaw, but I will not touch Cracow, Gallicia, or Wilna” (Comeau, 281). [Back to paragraph text]

[19]  Corr, 11,339. Instructing Andreossy, his new Ambassador at Vienna, the Emperor says he wishes to force nothing; but if Austria would be inclined to exchange Gallicia for part of Silesia, he is ready to treat, either openly or secretly. This was early in December, 1806. [Back to paragraph text]

[20]  Corr. 11,279, dated 19th November 1806. [Back to paragraph text]

[21]  De Fezensac, p. 125. [Back to paragraph text]

[22]  Warsaw, Posen, Kalisch, Bromberg, Plock, Bialystok. [Back to paragraph text]

[23]  Corr. 11,630, decree of 14th January, 1807. [Back to paragraph text]

[24]  West Prussia was divided into four departments, having their capitals at Berlin, Custrin, Stettin, and Magdeburg. The existing local administrative officers were generally retained, but the Emperor appointed his own men to the general financial control, and for the collection of the contributions with which the towns and states had been assessed (Savary, iii. 3).
     Napoleon was not seriously troubled by disturbances in Germany. His hold on the country was too firm, and the strength of the army of occupation too great, to encourage insurrection.
     The Hessian troops, from which he thought trouble might arise, were got out of the way in Holland, France and Naples (Savary, iii. 2).
     An attempted insurrection in Hesse Cassel, the Elector of which had been deprived by Napoleon of his territories, was put down in a manner calculated to discourage any further outbreaks. [Back to paragraph text]