Talk:War of the Second Coalition

Political reasons for the involvement of the Russian Empire?

I've been trying to understand more the history of the Russian Empire's involvement in the Napoleonic wars, but so far many of the articles are lacking even a simple explanation as to why the Russian Empire joined the Second Coalition (but not the First). I've been able to gather some assumptive positions based on Catherine's motivation, but this article is odd in that it has a background for the motivations of the various belligerents, but then all of a sudden Russia has an Army in Switzerland and Northern Italy, but with no explanations of the lead up to deploying this force, or why it did. I understand the general concept of ancien regimes being worried over the new French Republic, but then why did Russia only join the Second Coalition and not the First if it was so worried about its monarchy? Why deploy to Italy? I can't find any article explaining the Russian position in the Napoleonic wars, while other countries have very obvious ones that are explicitly laid out. Nothing-Significant-to-Report (talk) 18:47, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

@Nothing-Significant-to-Report maybe because the Coalition naming conventions are just deceiving. Since the wars of the 1st Coalition was really only centered around the frontiers of France against Austria and Prussia I suppose Russia didn't really have a reason to get involved. Only when France Humbled Austria and treated Vienna itself, Russia chose to get involved since the next step after Austria would naturally become the Russian frontier. I'd also bet that England ha d ah and at this stage here by recruiting and organizing the broad Coalition at this time after realizing the danger that revolutionary France posed to the balance of power after the War of the first Coalition. Youni89 (talk) 21:11, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Archduke Johann of Austria

Was 8 years old at the time of the Battle of Hohenlinden. Are you sure there wasn't more than one? Slac speak up! 12:39, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

No, the Archduke Johann of Austria of Hohenlinden was 18 years old at the time. He was the figurehead commander of the Habsburg army which fought at Hohenlinden. It was not uncommon for a Habsburg to be given the titular command whereas the chief of staff would then be the practical leader of the army. -- fdewaele, 9 February 2008, 14:08.

Quasi-War and War of the Second Coalition

I'm trying to add a section to explain why the Quasi-War is mentioned in the info-box to this page, but I can't really think of any other links (apart from the fact that they happened at the same time and France was involved with both) between the Quasi-War and this war. Does someone else with more knowledge willing to help me out here? DeeRD (talk) 16:01, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

The United States was not a party to any of the European alliances, but it was peripherally involved. France demanded that the U.S. participate on its side of the French Revolutionary Wars because of a mutual-assistance treaty that had been concluded during the American Revolution. The U.S. took the position that the treaty had no validity because it had been concluded with the Kingdom of France, not the French Republic. (In that era, treaties were often viewed as between governments, not nations.) The U.S. concluded a pact with Britain (the Jay Treaty) in 1795, giving Britain favorable trade terms. The French, at war with Britain, responded by attacking U.S. shipping. The U.S. and Britain then co-operated in defense against French attacks, which made the U.S. a co-belligerent to the allies of the Second Coalition. Later on in the Napoleonic era, the U.S. was a co-belligerent on the French side, against Great Britain, in what we call the War of 1812. Jsc1973 (talk) 19:31, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

thanks a lot for that! I remember reading that from the source I was looking at but I guess the pieces just didn't fit together for me. DeeRD (talk) 22:32, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Quasi-War should not be included.

By definition, the USA cannot be included in the War of the Second Coalition because they were not members of the alliance. The Quasi-War was an undeclared naval conflict which has no relation to this conflict beyond the fact that it involved one of the participants. This just seems like a fairly arbitrary attempt to shoehorn in a reference to the USA in a war that really doesn't concern it in any way. 94.175.80.212 (talk) 11:54, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

National Convention

In the section of "War of the First Coalition" the article says that National Convention declared war on Austria in April. However it wasn't until September that Convention was created. So, I think we should just write "Revolutionary France declared war on Austria" --Tokoko (talk) 07:58, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

This Week's Article for Improvement: French Revolutionary Wars

French Revolutionary Wars has been nominated by WP:TAFI. All contributions improving this article welcome! Cheers, ^walk victor falk ^talk 04:09, 19 May 2014 (UTC)]]

Ottomans?

It clearly says in the article Napoleonic Wars, 'The Second Coalition was formed in 1798 by Austria, Great Britain, the Kingdom of Naples, the Ottoman Empire, the Papal States, Portugal, Russia, Sweden and other states.' elmasmelih 21:01, 30 August 2014 (UTC)