Napoleon’s bicentenary

[Armenian Bishop]

I don't know why there's so much hostility against Napoleon, in this Thread. The consensus of viewpoint has long been established for Napoleon as a military genius. He did his homework too, with notes taken down in the margin areas of the books he was reading. Austerlitz was only one of many examples for his military masterpieces. That being said, of course he made blunders, of course Napoleon didn't do everything right, but of course Napoleon did very very many things very well.

[Centurion]

Thank you Samnium to have made the effort to argue with these chauvinists in denial. The Emperor would have been proud of you.

Napoléon was in the Pantheon of the demi-god of war, and he outperformed by far all generals in History. Even the greatest generals among his enemies (and Wellington among the most notables of them) admired him and knew his value.



France, anyway, is the nation which has won the most battles in the whole History.



France, wether Napoléon was at its head or not, has defeated 7 coalitions of European powers.. How pathetic and mediocre is it from these European powers to need to coalesce 7 times against a nation to finally defeat it? The truth is that others Europeans know it and try to put emphasis on some failures from France and Napoléon in order to hide their own mediocrity. And at the forefront of this we always see the same: English, Spaniards and Austrians.

Lol at Napoléon "ambitious and power-hungry". Like if England was different. Like if the monarchs of Spain, Austrian, Prussia and Russia were different. They were always trying to push their agendas for power and domination. When they felt that Napoléon was too much powerful, they were bending like pussies but when Napoléon was magnanimous and tried sincerely to find an arrangement for peace (and he did that A LOT) they took it as a occasion to foment coalition instead, with the money and England and of the Rothschild. Napoléon was far more noble than them. Even the guerilleros in Spain were just retarded fanatics manipulated by the Inquisition and financed by external powers. They were nothing more valuable than today's jihadists.

Yes, millions people died. But it's not Napoléon that is to be blamed for this, but the European powers and the Jewish finance.

As for the comparison with Hitler, it makes sense in many aspects. As he was a genius and fought against coalitions fomented by the Anglo-Saxons and the Jewish finance too.

Those 60,000 troops lost would have come in handy in Spain or Russia.

Napoléon sent 600 000 troops in Russia. These 60 000 troops were a details at the time when France was the China of Europe. As Napoléon said "a night of Paris will repopulate all of this"

Also, Napoléon was blue-eyed brunet with a pinkish skin, a phenotype which is common among the French. He was 1m69, so taller than the average European at the time.

[Armenian Bishop]

Napoleon's Austerlitz Victory, and the Ulm Campaign, both have long been established as military masterpieces. At Ulm (September-October, 1805), more than 60,000 Austrians surrendered to the French, at the price of 2,000 French casualties. At Austerlitz (December, 1805), Allied Coalition casualties were 36,000, while the French lost 9,000.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulm_campaign

The Ulm campaign lasted for nearly a month and saw the French army under Napoleon deliver blow after blow to the confused Austrians. It culminated on 20 October with the loss of an entire Austrian army.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Austerlitz

[At Austerlitz] Napoleon did not succeed in defeating the Allied army as thoroughly as he wanted, but historians and enthusiasts alike recognize that the original plan provided a significant victory, comparable to other great tactical battles such as Cannae.

[Davystayn]

Maybe because :

- Reorganization of civil administration : creation of the prefects is an example, he simplified the bureaucracy
- Banque de France and "franc germinal", which was a new money
- Founded the lycées, which are the equivalent of high school in USA/UK
- Creation of several officers school like St-Cyr which has been created to provide a solid education to officers
- Code Civil, which is basically the basis of French law
- The Concordat of 1801 which reconciled the church with French state
- The creation of modern egyptology with the Egypt expedition and later on, the creation of several museums dedicated to this civilization
- Improvement of the agricultural sector
- Modernization of french army, he put also a great effort to develop artillery
- Legion of Honour, which is a distinction still used today
- The universal adoption of the metric system in weights and measurements
- Imperial art and architecture, he notoriously promoted arts and litterature, many artists like Canova etc. became official artists
- Organised public welfare
- Created labour tribunals (Prudhommes, 1806)
- Banned or limited child labour
- Ordered and oversaw the building of canals, roads, harbours, tribunals, schools, prisons and fortifications.
- Created two ministries, and later an Accounts Court* (16th of September 1807) to oversee public money, and ensure that it was collected and spent properly.
- Road and house numbering
- Baccalauréat, which is the exam that you pass after having studied in a lycée
- Arc de Triomphe
- Modern universities
- French departments
- Sciences funding, tin can were invented after a contest made by Napoleon for example
- Left-hand traffic
- Sugar beet (again, a discovery made after Napoleon requested a product to replace the sugar detained by English)
- "Conseil d'Etat" and Senate creation which are still very important institutions in French political life
- Cadastre
- Modern police

I have to continue ?

Great achievements yes, but he also threw Europe into 20 years of war

[Andullero]

I don't know why there's so much hostility against Napoleon, in this Thread. The consensus of viewpoint has long been established for Napoleon as a military genius. He did his homework too, with notes taken down in the margin areas of the books he was reading. Austerlitz was only one of many examples for his military masterpieces. That being said, of course he made blunders, of course Napoleon didn't do everything right, but of course Napoleon did very very many things very well.

My hostility as a New Worlder is warranted, cuz after all, his blunder in Saint-Domingue practically gave birth to the Third World with the mess called "Republique d'Haiti". Although in favor of the corporal, I must say that he had the unfortunate task of cleaning up the mess left by the indecisiveness of the first French Republic as far as the colonies went. Both the Jacobins and the Directory people simply couldnt make up their minds as to what they wanted to do with the slave population of these islands, that's for certain.

[Rethel]

France, anyway, is the nation which has won the most battles in the whole History.

Comparing 5 years CSA to 1000 years Rome... and France with Napoleon among
them... sure... it is sooo oooobjective, not subjective at all... Jean-Luc would say:

[Centurion]

Great achievements yes, but he also threw Europe into 20 years of war

It's the Revolution which sent Europe into war. And England helped to foment it just in an attempt to weaken France. Just like England fomented coalitions against France, perpetuating this state of war.

[Mortimer]

Napoleon was constantly attacked by England and has to answer.

Napoleon has made dozens of good things in France, he has created several schools, reorganized the administration, created the code civil... Also it is proven that he died in catholicism...

Facts : Napoléon forbade unions between black and white, established again slavery and said that he was only in favor of White.

I didnt know that about Napoleon, but if that is true he seems like a good heroe and role model for french nationalists. Viva la France.

[Davystayn]

Don't be jealous, France is the country with the most battles won in human history. Napoleon is probably the best military commander in military history, Iena, Wagram, Pyramids, Austerlitz... He defeated coalitions made by England, Prussia, Spain, Austria, Russia...

If you call that a failure... You would be one of those who say that Alexander the Great failed because his empire lasted only a short amount of time.



Just LOL, the best specialists of Napoleon called him a military genius, Hegel and many others great minds were very impressed by him (Hegel saw him riding on a horse). Even Beethoven who dedicated and composed his 3th symphony in his honour, even if he later got disappointed.

If he wasn't an outstanding strategist explain me how he won against far larger forces and why his tactics is studied in all military schools in the world and has been an idol for many famous officers.



England was constantly making up coalitions against Napoleon, and England was funded by Rothschild by the way...



Laws codification, reorganization of the local administration, creation of new schools...

Asking this question proves how much you're biased, probably because you're spanish. I can say that you slaughtered dozens of millions of indigenous people (far more than all the combined deaths of Napoleonic wars which anyway were primarily provocated by England coalitions) then why taking pride in Spanish empire.

How many battles France fought were on home soil? The position of France as a continental power surrounded by potential enemies always meant it had to develop as a powerful land power and get invaded a lot. Far far easier to fight your battles at home, much harder when most of your battles are fought far from home lol.

I have top respect for France and Napoleon as a General but venerated as he is seems odd to me, seeing as he just abandoned 500,000 of his own men to freeze to death in Russia and caused the loss of live for millions of European men drafted in on all sides to fight for virtually nothing.

[Diego Garcia]

Thank you Samnium to have made the effort to argue with these chauvinists in denial. The Emperor would have been proud of you.

Napoléon was in the Pantheon of the demi-god of war, and he outperformed by far all generals in History. Even the greatest generals among his enemies (and Wellington among the most notables of them) admired him and knew his value.

France, wether Napoléon was at its head or not, has defeated 7 coalitions of European powers.. How pathetic and mediocre is it from these European powers to need to coalesce 7 times against a nation to finally defeat it? The truth is that others Europeans know it and try to put emphasis on some failures from France and Napoléon in order to hide their own mediocrity. And at the forefront of this we always see the same: English, Spaniards and Austrians.

Lol at Napoléon "ambitious and power-hungry". Like if England was different. Like if the monarchs of Spain, Austrian, Prussia and Russia were different. They were always trying to push their agendas for power and domination. When they felt that Napoléon was too much powerful, they were bending like pussies but when Napoléon was magnanimous and tried sincerely to find an arrangement for peace (and he did that A LOT) they took it as a occasion to foment coalition instead, with the money and England and of the Rothschild. Napoléon was far more noble than them. Even the guerilleros in Spain were just retarded fanatics manipulated by the Inquisition and financed by external powers. They were nothing more valuable than today's jihadists.

Yes, millions people died. But it's not Napoléon that is to be blamed for this, but the European powers and the Jewish finance.

As for the comparison with Hitler, it makes sense in many aspects. As he was a genius and fought against coalitions fomented by the Anglo-Saxons and the Jewish finance too.



Napoléon sent 600 000 troops in Russia. These 60 000 troops were a details at the time when France was the China of Europe. As Napoléon said "a night of Paris will repopulate all of this"

Also, Napoléon was blue-eyed brunet with a pinkish skin, a phenotype which is common among the French. He was 1m69, so taller than the average European at the time.

You have absolutely no clue about you're talking about. You got no idea about what happenned here in Spain, either before Napoleon, when Napoleon, or after Napoleon.

If you have dared state all that nonsense, it implies precisely that, that you are a historical illiterate. And to the bone.

Amongst the very ample myriade of mistakes Napoleon made, entering Spain was the worst of them, as Napoleon himself would recognise in his biography. He literally claimed he underestimated the Spaniards and that was his perdition.

Moreover, you got no clue about what the Inquisition did or quit doing, since the only source you have about it it's been both the French or the English sources, just a bunch of lies about that institution and about the History of Spain in general, made by their propagandistic machineries since the XVI century.

Not by accident you have taken Napoleon for a li'l nun of the Charity, a saint in life, a romantic personage. And not. Napoleon was a murderer, a criminal, just like the most cruel tyrants in History, like Stalin or Hitler. Try to look in a serious way into the real History, and not the falsified history they've made you to learn.

Napoleon, as said, and as many many Historians recognise, was just the best mayor of Paris.