The Russian Campaign
of 1812

Why did Napoleon Invade Russia?

by Richard Alley, UK

Most authors on this subject generally agree that by mid 1811 Napoleon, Emperor of the French and master of Western Europe, had finally made up his mind to invade Russia. The decision once made was to lead to the great man's abdication, and the destruction of the empire, which he and his soldiers had carved out of Europe during the previous 18 years. So why did he do it, what were the reasons? The first was Napoleon's overwhelming desire to destroy British trade in Europe and therefore force "perfidious Albion" to sue for peace. The second was to destroy or, at the very least, subjugate his one remaining mainland European opponent, Tsar Alexander I, and finally the third reason, the "Polish Question". This last "reason" also exercised Alexander's mind, and could I think have sparked Napoleon's final decision to invade. I would like to discuss these reasons in more detail: The Continental System was a means of economic warfare devised by Napoleon and imposed on each of his conquered foes. The successful implementation of the policy would have had two desirable effects, first the destruction of British trade in Europe, and second their replacement with French products; thereby enabling the French war economy to provide the finance required by Napoleon. (One will note however that the vast majority of the Grande Armée between 1905-13 was billeted in central Europe and not therefore the dreadful drain of the French economy that it was on the occupied nations). To implement the policy throughout the whole of Europe was of course essential and as a result Napoleon invaded Portugal through Spain in 1808. In hindsight the policy failed, although damaged, the British economy survived and perfidious Albion continued to be a thorn in the side of Napoleon's Spanish ulcer until his abdication. Indeed the British government was also able to pay subsidies to its European allies throughout this period, money, uniforms and equipment of all kinds including weaponry were provided in a successful policy to keep the beneficiaries in the field. At times Napoleon himself ignored the policy if he considered it in his own best interests, as did members of his family. It is therefore of no surprise that one of the main terms of the 1807 Treaty of Tilsit between France, Russia and Prussia was that the second and third parties adopted and enforced the continental system, and it was the Russia failure to maintain this treaty obligation which Napoleon was to use as his main and public cause to "justify" his decision to invade Russia. At Tilsit Alexander had fallen under the spell of Napoleon, but by the time of their next meeting at Erfurt in 1808, the Tsar was coming back to his senses. Russian trade, at that time, was very dependent on its links to the British market for raw materials, wood and jute in particular. As a result the Russian economy and the prosperity of its aristocracy was badly damaged. If one remembers that Alexander came to power after a palace coup d'etat, in which his father Tsar Paul had been murdered, it is not to difficult to imagine the Tsar's fears that history could be repeating itself, if the upper classes and court were being ruined! Napoleon, of course, saw the " change of wind" at the Russian court and by 1809, when he again went to war with Austria and asked for Russia's assistance, which did not materialise, there could be little doubt that he would have to impose himself on his Russian ally once more and force him back into line. The second reason for the Campaign now becomes clearer when it is considered that Napoleon after the successful but not outstanding defeat of the Austrians in 1809 was at a military, political and personal crossroads. He was master of Europe, save for Spain, Portugal, and Russia. If he had chosen to march the Grande Armée into the peninsula he could have destroyed the British forces without to much trouble, and with her only standing army destroyed surely the British would have sued for peace. Maybe Britain would still have attempted to ferment unrest but could such a policy have succeeded? However Napoleon always considered the Peninsula a "side-show" and instead of taking over the conduct of the war himself delegated command to various of his Marshal's, who because of their own ambitions fought a largely uncoordinated and unsuccessful series of campaigns which just served to bleed the Grande Armée of its veteran troops. The very men which would be needed if an invasion of Russia was to have any hope of being a success. If the peninsula problem could not have been solved by military methods then a political solution may well have succeeded. If Napoleon had re-instated a "friendly" Spanish monarchy then there are grounds to believe that the Spanish would have accepted the position and asked the British to leave. However such a solution would no doubt have caused much lose of Imperial face, and by this point in his career such would have been totally unacceptable. It goes without saying that from the military point of view, although the Grande Armée was past its best, it was still the mightiest and the best lead army in the world, but what use is an army if there is no one to fight! To stop and consolidate his hold over Europe was not Napoleon's "style". To maintain his power-base in France Napoleon had to have an enemy and the only practical target left was Alexander. From the political perspective, Napoleon was only secure so long as he was militarily omnipotent. For the time being this was clearly the case however even the Emperor foresaw that his "powers" were beginning to decline (although he would be the last to admit it). In such circumstances Napoleon was not the first military genius in history to attempt to consolidate his position by providing himself and his empire with an heir to continue the dynasty. However the Empress Josephine was no longer able to "assist" and therefore would have to be put aside. Who then was to become the mother of the successor? Napoleon made approaches, suggesting a marriage with Alexander's sister, Alexander and his court hesitated and the impatient Napoleon turned to Francis of Austria who gladly, encouraged by Metternich, offered up his daughter Louise. Josephine was divorced and the marriage was sped through. In time the King of Rome was born, others no doubt would have followed, and the history of Europe indeed the World would have changed to such an extent that it is hard to imagine what would have been the outcome? However, Napoleon was only too aware that yet again Alexander had not jumped into line and offered up his sister to be his new Empress. Was Europe big enough for both these men to continue in power without a show down, but what reason could Napoleon find to launch his armies forward to bring down this other Emperor? Yes the continued breach of the Treaty of Tilsit, but maybe Napoleon could force Alexander's hand and thus claim that he was no longer the aggressor, but merely the defender of his pan European empire. It was therefore the age-old problem of Poland that Napoleon realised he could use to manipulate a conflict between himself and Alexander. The Polish Question The Polish Question was therefore the final cause of the conflict, which lead to the destruction of the first empire, but what was the Polish question anyway? The territory we now know as Poland has always been of great military and strategic concern. The result of this has been that since the end of the Lithuanian/Polish (Teutonic) empire none of their successors have allowed an independent Poland to exist. I am no historian but I believe I may be correct in saying that Poland has only been an independent nation for two short periods, the first between the two world wars and the second only recently since the fall of the Berlin wall? The "Polish" have therefore always desired their independence and in the Napoleonic period the majority of them pinned their colours to the Imperial French flag. Poles have always been good and loyal soldiers. They served Napoleon well in central Europe and Spain and must surely have hoped that once Napoleon's enemies were vanquished their time would come. Remember that their "country" had been divided between Russia, Prussia and Austria. However, Napoleon was no fool and he knew that to create an independent Poland could cause war with all three of the above nations. At the time however Prussia didn't matter, it had been destroyed in 1806-7 and would almost certainly be unwilling to compound its own problems, but Russia and even Austria would not have stood by and allowed the birth of a free Poland. Maybe Austria would have knuckled under after the marriage or if Austrian polish territory had been left out the deal, but could Napoleon take the risk? It is not surprising therefore that Napoleon only took a first step by creating the Grand Duchy of Warsaw and even then he did not appoint a Pole as its "head of state", the King of Saxony was named as its ruler, he being one of Napoleon's most loyal new converts and a leading member of the Confederation of the Rhine. Alexander however considered the territory firmly within his own sphere of influence. The relationship between the Russian possessions in "Poland" and the Tsar were mixed. The people, no better off than the Russian serfs, had no say anyway, and it was they who flocked to the French colours whenever the call was made, in the hope of escape and a better future. Their officers from the polish nobility, who followed them, were of the same opinion, serving the French would in time be rewarded with advancement, riches and at least a fair chance their hope for a free Poland would be realised. However not all the polish nobility were of the same opinion. Many of the older and wealthier landowners had no wish whatsoever to see the status quo changed. The Tsar was good to them, they had kept their lands and serfs and their standard of living was as it had always been. The thought that Napoleon, with his revolutionary ideas, should free them from the Russian yolk was not at all attractive. Knowing the attitude of many of the nobility, Alexander was in no mood whatsoever to allow the creation of an independent but French dominated state on his western frontier. Napoleon could not be trusted, had he not recently invaded the northern Pomeranian provinces, the Duchy of Oldenburg! Where would it stop! Some elements of the Russian court and military were all for invading to pre-empt any French attempt to create a polish kingdom. Who would its ruler be a pro French Pole or even a Marshal of France, Davout it has been said would not of turned down the crown. Napoleon could or would not make up his mind, Alexander would not accept any change and Napoleon must have known the depth of feeling the uncertainly was creating. He began moving troops closer to the frontier; the Saxons were the first then Davoust's Divisions. Who was going to blink first, if Napoleon could make the Russians invade, he could cast himself as the defender of the poles and no doubt Europe would have given him the benefit of the doubt. Alexander however showed more sense and did not invade. Napoleon was left with no alternative but to invade. The Grande Armée had to be used or he would lose face. Back to Table of Contents -- First Empire #52 Back to First Empire List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 2000 by First Empire. This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com