![\"""\"](\""https:\/\/images.immediate.co.uk\/production\/volatile\/sites\/7\/2023\/02\/GettyImages464435469-fc784c7-e1675250699844.jpg?quality=90&resize=620%2C413"\" "\\"\"\"\\"\/")
<\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/picture><\/div>Before considering what would have happened next had Napoleon\u2019s Russian campaign been successful, it is instructive to first understand his motivation for putting so many of his men on the front line. It would be too easy to assume that Napoleon was simply empire-building and pursuing ambitions of controlling much of mainland Europe. This is not the case, as Michael Broers \u2013 professor of western European history at the University of Oxford and author of Napoleon: The Decline and Fall of an Empire, 1811\u20131821<\/em> (Pegasus Books, 2022) \u2013 explains.<\/p>\n \u201cNapoleon never intended to conquer Russia. It\u2019s an urban myth. His aim was to find the Russian army \u2013 the only one still strong enough to be a threat to him \u2013 and thump it. He knew he couldn\u2019t rule Russia. His objective was to make it too weak to fight him, and to force Tsar Alexander I to be his ally. Napoleon had no intention of deposing or replacing him, but he wanted to neutralise the Russians for as long as possible, and leave them too weak to worry him. The invasion was about containment.\u201d<\/p>\n In 2019 the skeleton of Charles-\u00c9tienne Gudin, a French general killed during Napoleon\u2019s 1812 invasion of Russia, was unearthed near the city of Smolensk. The remains were returned to France in 2021 and buried with full military honours.<\/p>\n <\/p><\/div> <\/section> Indeed, why the notion of Napoleon as the power-hungry expansionist out to conquer Russia has prevailed is a curious one. He himself admitted that Russian containment was the invasion\u2019s over-riding objective. \u201cThey must be pushed back into their ice,\u201d the French emperor reportedly announced, \u201cso that for the next 25 years, they no longer come to busy themselves with the affairs of civilised Europe.\u201d By reducing Russia\u2019s military potency, Napoleon wouldn\u2019t have to keep looking over his shoulder.<\/p>\n Had he been successful in his Russian mission, had he not retreated with just 100,000 survivors of his original 600,000-strong invasion force, what would have been the significance for eastern Europe? \u201cIf he had crushed Russia,\u201d says Professor Broers, \u201cit would have meant there would no longer have been a threat to his ally in Poland, the Duchy of Warsaw. Above all, it would have brought Russia back into the Continental Blockade against Britain \u2013 and so cut off the supplies that the Royal Navy needed for its ships.\u201d<\/p>\n The Continental Blockade was Napoleon\u2019s response to Britain\u2019s own blockade of the French coasts, and prohibited the importation of British goods into any countries that were allied to France. A weakened Russia would have been forced to adhere to the doctrine, in the process damaging Britain economically. \u201cThe whole aim of the invasion of Russia,\u201d confirms Professor Broers, \u201cwas, ultimately, to weaken Britain \u2013 and the Royal Navy especially. It would have been his first priority.\u201d<\/p>\n Indeed, had his troops accomplished their mission and emerged more intact than they were in defeat, an invasion of Britain could well have been on the cards. \u201cHe never gave up on it. He intended to invade Britain in 1811, but felt Russia had become the bigger threat.\u201d That being said, it is likely that an invasion of Britain would have been a dismal failure \u2013 even if Napoleon himself didn\u2019t see that.<\/p>\n In the first days of the summer of 1812, French emperor Napoleon Bonaparte sent 600,000 troops of his Grande Arm\u00e9e into Russia. The Russian army chose to protect its soldiers by withdrawing from certain cities, often razing them to the ground and ruining crops in an act of attrition warfare.<\/p>\n The French advanced but, with dwindling supplies, Napoleon\u2019s men struggled, suffering from hunger as well as diseases such as dysentery. Having lost great numbers in various skirmishes, a protracted time spent in burned-out Moscow convinced the emperor to retreat with a brutal winter on the horizon. He returned to Paris, having lost half a million of his men.<\/p>\n <\/p><\/div> <\/section> There\u2019s also a theory that Britain\u2019s other route around the Blockade, Spain, might well have found themselves subject to an amplification of the Peninsular War (which had begun in 1808), but Professor Broers disagrees. \u201cNapoleon\u2019s army fought on in Spain until the end \u2013 until it was driven out. He wanted \u2018out\u2019 of Spain for years; he saw it like Vietnam. With Russia back in the Blockade, it would not have mattered so much, as Britain would have been less of a threat.\u201d<\/p>\nDid you know?<\/h4>\n
Long journey home<\/h6>\n
A British invasion?<\/h3>\n
![\"""\"](\""https:\/\/images.immediate.co.uk\/production\/volatile\/sites\/7\/2023\/02\/GettyImages985646104-554af61-e1675250811828.jpg?quality=90&resize=620%2C412"\" "\\"\"\"\\"\/")
<\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/picture><\/div>In context<\/h4>\n