stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,857 
Likes: 13,243
|
Post by stevep on Dec 18, 2017 19:12:42 GMT
Probably the bloodiest in Europe but there are a number of candicates, especially in Asia that probably costs more lives. As Lordroel mentioned the Taiping Revolution is the most famous while other revolts in China and the wars of Genghis Khan and Tamerlain are probably also a good bit bloodier than even the ~3.5M figure meantioned for the Napoloenic period. As the article mentions some figures are even higher. Note also that those figures are only for 1803-1815, i.e. excluding the earlier French Revolutionary period. But going of track here on this thread, can we consider the Napoleonic Wars one single war with periods of peace ore must we consider it several separate wars. Good question. While normally referred to in the pural Britain was at war with Napoleon throughout the period, at least until his initial surrender in 1814. Hence for us it was one continous conflict. Other countries were at war or peace or even, most noticeably with Spain prior to 1807, an ally. The Spanish after the French occupation were the most persistence opponent until French troops left their country. Austria was a member of every coalition other than the 1806-07 one involving Prussia and Russia although it came a bit late to the 1813 final coalition and fought effectively alone in 1809. [Britain was at war but effectively unable to directly aid its ally. Technically the Bourbon kingdom of the Two Sicilies [Sicily and southern Italy] was also at war for much of this period. However other than occasional raids into southern Italy it basically sat in Sicily protected by the RN while its mainland territories were occupied by the French. Hence how effective that state of war was I don't know. Basically depends on who your speaking to and what measure you use.  |
|
|
|
Post by marshalsoult on Dec 23, 2017 12:14:13 GMT
The Napoleonic wars were the bloodiest ever until the world wars. Probably the bloodiest in Europe but there are a number of candicates, especially in Asia that probably costs more lives. As Lordroel mentioned the Taiping Revolution is the most famous while other revolts in China and the wars of Genghis Khan and Tamerlain are probably also a good bit bloodier than even the ~3.5M figure meantioned for the Napoloenic period. As the article mentions some figures are even higher. Note also that those figures are only for 1803-1815, i.e. excluding the earlier French Revolutionary period. True,actually the War of 1812 was sort of a branch of the Napoleonic wars, the Americans were selling to France but Britain didn't want that so they kept taking their ships, I mean its separate but on the other hand, it could be considered a Branch. |
|
|
|
Post by marshalsoult on Dec 23, 2017 12:15:22 GMT
Probably the bloodiest in Europe but there are a number of candicates, especially in Asia that probably costs more lives. As Lordroel mentioned the Taiping Revolution is the most famous while other revolts in China and the wars of Genghis Khan and Tamerlain are probably also a good bit bloodier than even the ~3.5M figure meantioned for the Napoloenic period. As the article mentions some figures are even higher. Note also that those figures are only for 1803-1815, i.e. excluding the earlier French Revolutionary period. But going of track here on this thread, can we consider the Napoleonic Wars one single war with periods of peace ore must we consider it several separate wars. I think the usual dates are 1803-1815, although the revolutionary wars get messed up in that. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,857
Likes: 13,243
|
Post by stevep on Dec 24, 2017 12:22:26 GMT
But going of track here on this thread, can we consider the Napoleonic Wars one single war with periods of peace ore must we consider it several separate wars. I think the usual dates are 1803-1815, although the revolutionary wars get messed up in that. By the way, given your naming yourself after the 'Duke of Damnation'  would I be right in assuming you have an interest in the period or possibly just that Marshall? |
|
|
|
Post by marshalsoult on Jan 1, 2018 12:50:03 GMT
I think the usual dates are 1803-1815, although the revolutionary wars get messed up in that. By the way, given your naming yourself after the 'Duke of Damnation' would I be right in assuming you have an interest in the period or possibly just that Marshall? Oh the period by far, he's always been interesting. No I have many books on the Napoleonic wars, my favorite period, I always found the waterloo Alternate question not really worth it, he would've been defeated by another army within weeks, I'd say it was the Siege of Acre, that was just about the Ottomans death blow. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,857
Likes: 13,243
|
Post by stevep on Jan 1, 2018 19:03:10 GMT
By the way, given your naming yourself after the 'Duke of Damnation' would I be right in assuming you have an interest in the period or possibly just that Marshall? Oh the period by far, he's always been interesting. No I have many books on the Napoleonic wars, my favorite period, I always found the waterloo Alternate question not really worth it, he would've been defeated by another army within weeks, I'd say it was the Siege of Acre, that was just about the Ottomans death blow. I don't know about that. Even if you manage to avoid Nelson's victory at Abukir Bay, Napoleon is still very much isolated and short of supplies and reinforcement. If the French had won at Acre their still got a bloody long way to Constantinople and especially with British domination of the seas supply is going to be difficult either from France or a restive Egypt. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,033
Likes: 49,439
|
Post by lordroel on Jan 5, 2018 11:46:53 GMT
By the way, given your naming yourself after the 'Duke of Damnation' would I be right in assuming you have an interest in the period or possibly just that Marshall? always found the waterloo Alternate question not really worth it, he would've been defeated by another army within weeks, So instead of OTL Hundred Days we would have something else. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,857
Likes: 13,243
|
Post by stevep on Jan 5, 2018 16:03:16 GMT
always found the waterloo Alternate question not really worth it, he would've been defeated by another army within weeks, So instead of OTL Hundred Days we would have something else. They might still manage to call it 100 days but just use a different - slightly later start time, or simply be somewhat inaccurate. After all the 100 years war was waged from 1337 to 1453! |
|
|
|
Post by marshalsoult on Jan 10, 2018 11:33:50 GMT
Oh the period by far, he's always been interesting. No I have many books on the Napoleonic wars, my favorite period, I always found the waterloo Alternate question not really worth it, he would've been defeated by another army within weeks, I'd say it was the Siege of Acre, that was just about the Ottomans death blow. I don't know about that. Even if you manage to avoid Nelson's victory at Abukir Bay, Napoleon is still very much isolated and short of supplies and reinforcement. If the French had won at Acre their still got a bloody long way to Constantinople and especially with British domination of the seas supply is going to be difficult either from France or a restive Egypt. The Ottomans were very weak, that was about the largest resistance they could get, would it have made a difference, I don't know, if He did win would he get supporters like he wanted, its hard to say. But what made him lose was the British, ironic how the powers will switch sides after fighting to destroy them. The Crimean War is the epitome of that. |
|
|
|
Post by marshalsoult on Jan 10, 2018 11:34:47 GMT
always found the waterloo Alternate question not really worth it, he would've been defeated by another army within weeks, So instead of OTL Hundred Days we would have something else. Well it wasn't a Hundred days anyway, probably 200 days if he won. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,033
Likes: 49,439
|
Post by lordroel on Jan 10, 2018 15:37:06 GMT
So instead of OTL Hundred Days we would have something else. Well it wasn't a Hundred days anyway, probably 200 days if he won. Also i can assume a certain Duke will not become as famous as OTL. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,857
Likes: 13,243
|
Post by stevep on Jan 10, 2018 18:37:05 GMT
Well it wasn't a Hundred days anyway, probably 200 days if he won. Also i can assume a certain Duke will not become as famous as OTL. If he's still got the OTL experience in India and Iberia he will still be pretty famous but he won't have the same level of prestige as OTL for the final defeat of Napoleon. [With a significant helping hand from the Prussians.] |
|
|
|
Post by marshalsoult on Jan 17, 2018 14:13:32 GMT
Well it wasn't a Hundred days anyway, probably 200 days if he won. Also i can assume a certain Duke will not become as famous as OTL. If you mean Wellington, yeah. I still say He's overrated, Waterloo was won by Blucher. |
|
|
|
Post by marshalsoult on Jan 17, 2018 14:14:34 GMT
Also i can assume a certain Duke will not become as famous as OTL. If he's still got the OTL experience in India and Iberia he will still be pretty famous but he won't have the same level of prestige as OTL for the final defeat of Napoleon. [With a significant helping hand from the Prussians.] Exactly, he'd be more like Moore. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,033
Likes: 49,439
|
Post by lordroel on Jan 17, 2018 14:18:21 GMT
If he's still got the OTL experience in India and Iberia he will still be pretty famous but he won't have the same level of prestige as OTL for the final defeat of Napoleon. [With a significant helping hand from the Prussians.] Exactly, he'd be more like Moore. Wich Moore, also could somebody take his place, i doubt if he lost the Battle of Waterloo he can keep his job. |
|
would I be right in assuming you have an interest in the period or possibly just that Marshall?