Traditionally, historians believe that the wars of the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars saw the advent of a new kind of warfare, different from earlier wars. While both conflicts contained aspects of earlier wars, like high casualty rates, new Enlightenment philosophies pushed the French into reorganizing their military, creating inflammatory rhetoric, and developing new, devastating military tactics. Examining the dichotomy between military and civilian life, the purpose of war, and how war was fought in the ancien régime and the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars demonstrates the fundamental differences between these two periods.
Historians, like David Bell, argue that the wars of the ancien régime were fundamentally different from …show more content…
Warfare was so deeply connected to the aristocratic way of life it was regarded as a reflection of their codes of conduct. Honor and glory were key aspects of aristocratic identity prior to the French Revolution. However, aristocratic honor was not moral, as it is generally regarded in modern contexts, but performative and it dictated how an officer should and could behave in battle. Glory also contributed to the importance of military life among elites. Often, rulers went to war because it was expected of them. War was where rulers could prove their military capabilities and pursue glory by acting honorably in battle. aristocratic code during this period helped to limit warfare despite developments in weaponry, tactics, fortifications, and military …show more content…
Enlightenment thinkers looked to history and society to uncover if sustainable peace was truly possible and they found hope that war would soon become unnecessary. Recent history demonstrated that commerce was binding nations together in a way that reduced religious tensions that had been major causes for war in the past. However, as more thought went into ideas of peace philosophers also created justifications for larger and devastating wars. As Bell states, “They transformed peace from a moral imperative into a historical one. And so they opened the door to the idea that in the name of future peace, any and all means might be justified—including even exterminatory
Historians, like David Bell, argue that the wars of the ancien régime were fundamentally different from …show more content…
Warfare was so deeply connected to the aristocratic way of life it was regarded as a reflection of their codes of conduct. Honor and glory were key aspects of aristocratic identity prior to the French Revolution. However, aristocratic honor was not moral, as it is generally regarded in modern contexts, but performative and it dictated how an officer should and could behave in battle. Glory also contributed to the importance of military life among elites. Often, rulers went to war because it was expected of them. War was where rulers could prove their military capabilities and pursue glory by acting honorably in battle. aristocratic code during this period helped to limit warfare despite developments in weaponry, tactics, fortifications, and military …show more content…
Enlightenment thinkers looked to history and society to uncover if sustainable peace was truly possible and they found hope that war would soon become unnecessary. Recent history demonstrated that commerce was binding nations together in a way that reduced religious tensions that had been major causes for war in the past. However, as more thought went into ideas of peace philosophers also created justifications for larger and devastating wars. As Bell states, “They transformed peace from a moral imperative into a historical one. And so they opened the door to the idea that in the name of future peace, any and all means might be justified—including even exterminatory