In his text A mad, bad, and dangerous people Boyd Hilton documents the wars with Napoleonic France and how they impacted British society. He argues that Britain went to all-out war with France when it became apparent that Napoleon and Tsar Alexander of Russia formed an alliance at Tilsit, with the potential to overpower nations such as Denmark, Sweden, and Portugal . Moreover, without British intervention, Napoleon would attain more power than he already had in 1807. Hilton argues that there was no alternative – Britain had to go to war with France – or else the Danish navy would be under Napoleon’s control . Britain launched a military-naval expedition to the Baltic sea and bombarded Copenhagen without making an official declaration of war
…show more content…
In the case of diplomacy during the wars, Britain depended upon forging alliances with other European nations if they were ever to defeat Napoleon. Britain often considered themselves as separate from the continent, however victory over Napoleon rested upon necessary changes in British society, becoming ‘European’ by instigating colonial resistance movements in various territories under threat of Napoleonic acquisition such as Spain . Britain considered it vital to disrupt the Spanish empire, so that the French could not fully incorporate it and the empire had too many territories for full scale bombardment and carefully planned relations with resistance movements in Spanish colonies was the best course of …show more content…
Throughout the 1810s Britain became more serious and methodical about winning the war. The government continued to foster diplomatic relations with other European nations and were the untitled leaders of the Sixth Coalition, which became stronger than ever thanks to Britain’s dominance and in 1813 Prussia (formerly allied with Napoleon) joined the Coalition with Austria re-joining in June, Sweden in July, and the German states of Bavaria and Saxony in October . The British insisted upon paying them large subsidies to foster better relations with them and as an incentive to strengthen their forces, and from 1813-15 a total of £26 million was shared between Russia, Sweden, Prussia, Spain, Portugal, and Austria
In the case of diplomacy during the wars, Britain depended upon forging alliances with other European nations if they were ever to defeat Napoleon. Britain often considered themselves as separate from the continent, however victory over Napoleon rested upon necessary changes in British society, becoming ‘European’ by instigating colonial resistance movements in various territories under threat of Napoleonic acquisition such as Spain . Britain considered it vital to disrupt the Spanish empire, so that the French could not fully incorporate it and the empire had too many territories for full scale bombardment and carefully planned relations with resistance movements in Spanish colonies was the best course of …show more content…
Throughout the 1810s Britain became more serious and methodical about winning the war. The government continued to foster diplomatic relations with other European nations and were the untitled leaders of the Sixth Coalition, which became stronger than ever thanks to Britain’s dominance and in 1813 Prussia (formerly allied with Napoleon) joined the Coalition with Austria re-joining in June, Sweden in July, and the German states of Bavaria and Saxony in October . The British insisted upon paying them large subsidies to foster better relations with them and as an incentive to strengthen their forces, and from 1813-15 a total of £26 million was shared between Russia, Sweden, Prussia, Spain, Portugal, and Austria