Why were the Prussians so inept during the Napoleonic wars?

Why did the Prussians preform so poorly that they were conquered by Napoleon ? What changed between then and the times of Fredrick the Great?

>What changed between then and the times of Fredrick the Great?
Napoleon

>Why did the Prussians preform so poorly that they were conquered by Napoleon ?

Not only that, but in merely 19 days!
The only country to have done worse during that era was Portugal (conquered in 11 days a year after Prussia)

They tried to solo France, bad idea

Not really
They were allied with Russia and Britain in the Fourth Coalition
Sure Brits usually remain hidden on their island, but the Russian army was marching toward Prussia to assist them in the incoming fight
Thing is that Napoleon anticipated that and swiftly invaded and defeated Prussia before the Russians could show up

This thread seems to pop up from time to time. One big reason is the Prussians felt confortable in their power since the days of Frederic and barely changed anything, many of their officers had little experience because Prussia was not doing too much fighting in the late 1700s (as opposed to France's constant fighting), and supposedly their equipment was also outdated. The Prussian scouts and logistics were not as good as Napoleon's so when he attacked them they had no idea where he was or the ability to properly respond while the French found the Prussian flank, attacked it with columns and just swept the Prussians away. The single battle at Jena obliterated the Prussians and after 1807 they spent all their time modernizing, reforming and rethinking everything. When they came back in 1813 they had adopted many things from the Russians and still kept changing as much they could with victories/defeats while the French at this time were slowly falling behind in equipment.

Russia hadn't adequately mobilized to be any use, if Prussia had of just joined the 3rd Coalition it probably all could have been avoided

That's an interesting theory, I can't stipulate too much what would have happened then but i'm pretty sure in those years Prussia and Austria were still both trying to become "the" german power and influence their small neighbours. If i remember well pre-1805 many states looked to Prussia for unification and when they were defeated many states turned to Austria. This could answer why neither were helping each other but should Prussia have joined the allies in Austerlitz, it would have been a different outcome surely.

No one in Germany had taken the nationalism unification pill in 1805, Napolean sort of made that a thing by wrecking all the independent states

>had of just joined

I hole-hardedly agree, but allow me to play doubles advocate here for a moment. For all intensive purposes I think you are wrong. In an age where false morals are a diamond dozen, true virtues are a blessing in the skies. We often put our false morality on a petal stool like a bunch of pre-Madonnas, but you all seem to be taking something very valuable for granite. So I ask of you to mustard up all the strength you can because it is a doggy dog world out there. Although there is some merit to what you are saying it seems like you have a huge ship on your shoulder. In your argument you seem to throw everything in but the kids Nsync, and even though you are having a feel day with this I am here to bring you back into reality. I have a sick sense when it comes to these types of things. It is almost spooky, because I cannot turn a blonde eye to these glaring flaws in your rhetoric. I have zero taller ants when it comes to people spouting out hate in the name of moral righteousness. You just need to remember what comes around is all around, and when supply and command fails you will be the first to go. Make my words, when you get down to brass stacks it doesn't take rocket appliances to get two birds stoned at once. It's clear who makes the pants in this relationship, and sometimes you just have to swallow your prize and accept the facts. You might have to come to this conclusion through denial and error but I swear on my mother's mating name that when you put the petal to the medal you will pass with flying carpets like it’s a peach of cake.

Then it must have been the year of 1806 my bad

*slow claps*

*steps out of the shadows*

Heh... not bad, kid. Not bad at all. Your meme, I mean. It's not bad. A good first attempt. It's plenty dank... I can tell it's got some thought behind it... Lots of quotable material...

But memeing isn't all sunshine and rainbows, kid. You're skilled... that much I can tell. But do you have what it takes to be a Memester? To join those esteemed meme ranks? To call yourself a member of the Ruseman's Corps? Memeing takes talent, that much is true. But more than that it takes heart. The world-class Memesters - I mean the big guys, like Johnny Hammersticks and Billy Kuahana - they're out there day and night, burning the midnight meme-oil, working tirelessly to craft that next big meme.

And you know what, kid? 99 times out of a hundred, that new meme fails. Someone dismisses it as bait, or says it's "tryhard," or ignores it as they copy/paste the latest shitpost copypasta dreamt up by those sorry excuses for cut-rate memers over at reddit. The Meme Game is rough, kid, and I don't just mean the one you just lost :^). It's a rough business, and for every artisan meme you craft in your meme bakery, some cocksucker at 9gag has a picture of a duck or some shit that a million different Johnny No-Names will attach a milion different captions to. Chin up, kid. Don't get all mopey on me. You've got skill. You've got talent. You just need to show your drive.

See you on the boards...

More like 1866, no one really have a shit about German identity until 1848

Unification and german identity was not a thing for most high class and noblemen who clung to power in their small states but the germans very much did contemplate uniting after the HRE was gone. Many germans from around the place joined Austria's forces as jagers and volunteers when they started wanting Austria to be the unifying aspect in around 1807. Assassination attempts on Napoleon were made by germans living in his allied countries who were fueled by nationalist intentions. I think the Bavarians had attempted to be the unifying state of the germans for a while which the French backed their claims to the throne (the holy roman one) but i don't think many german states had confidence in them especially since they supressed patriots in Tyrol.

>Not really

>Influenced by his wife Queen Louise and the war party in Berlin, in August 1806 the Prussian king Friedrich Wilhelm III made the decision to go to war independently of any other great power, save the distant Russia.

>save the distant Russia

>distant

It wasn't a thing for anybody, the Confederation of the Rhine being a willing part of Napoleons war machine proves that

The Confederation of the Rhine could have been a kind of united republic but Napoleon gained them precicely because of the princes and so it was never unified. The confederation was also seen to some germans as 'traitors' by allying with the french and as republican hope for others so the unity had a lot of political cracks but still, many germans were starting to get nationalist feelings in the 1800s, in part thanks to the recent republics of USA and France but they were unsure which part of them should be the unifying part. Hard to stick together a bunch of princes who all want to lead.

>1813
>French slowly falling behind in equipment

Oh , so I guess we finally discovered the reason of Napoleon loosing in the end. The equipment. And not fighting 1 v 10 like I thought!

Germans were powerless since ever. Frederick the great is trash.

Well if you can't replace the lost equipment and the man you lost in your campaigns it certainly will hinder your war efforts and help your enemies to overcome you.
Th rest of your post is the french equivalent of a wehraboo whining about being outnumbered.

It's not exactly that the equipment was 'trash' per say but unlike the progress the french made from 1805-1812 their gear had not changed too much post-Russia. I never said being outnumbered had nothing to do with losing don't put words in my mouth. Frederick was one of Napoleon's biggest inspirations not only in character but how, like Suvorov, he moved his armies extremely quickly and destroyed larger foes with the odds against him.

You sound butthurt, are you butthurt by any chance?

Did Frederick actually do that or is he memed hust thanks to the miracles?
Honest question btw, it just seems most of what Ive read about him were those two miracles

I have not tudied Frederick specifically to know how much of strategy is his own and how much is luck. What i do know is that (i think Frederick was inspired by Carolus Rex if i remember) Frederick used situations to his advantage and changed his plans accordingly as well. That may be luck or miracles and having the idea to perform strategic acts of genius might also be luck itself but on the long run he fended off large armies from different directions while deffending a relatively vulnerable country while at the same time annexing Silesia and going on the offensive. I'm personally really not a big fan of Prussia i much prefer the other german states but Frederick was a great figure truly.

> i much prefer the other german states
such as?

I like Bavaria because muh grandpa was from that area but I don't know shit about it as an independent German state/kingdom.