Was Napoleon Good?

[Aelex]

I will never understand how people came up with this "French just surrender lol" stereotype when for centuries, long before 1860, they were the nation in Europe.

I mean, French was a second language for many back then.

Bush's propaganda.
It's way easier to say that people don't wanna join your war because they are cowards who surrender as soon as they see an ennemy and need other to fight for them rather than to acknowledge that if they don't want to follow you, it's maybe because your motives or casus belli ain't right in the first place.

[Rio Cana]

Would the French King Charlemagne not be considered Napoleons equal. Found out that Napoleon tried to use Charlemagne connection to the HRE to get public opinion in the German principalities to favor his cause and unity to France.

This explains it - http://global.unc.edu/event/the-cult-of ... f-germany/

In the end, King Charlemagne was not ousted. Even Charles de Gaulle did better then Napoleon in the end.

[Morr]

What is Athens.

I don't know, what was Athens per than a slave economy whose women would be jealous of the level of freedom provided in Saudi Arabia?

Napoleon reintroduced slavery after it had been abolished by the Revolution, iirc.

I don't think women in Athens had any less freedom than they did in France, really. Napoleon hated women, and said they are merely the orchard of men that bear their fruit, and he applied very explicit double standards in law. Napoleon hated women so much that Josephine wrote him before and said some of the things she heard through rumor of him saying about women were very upsetting and to please stop, to which Napoleon replied that of anything he said of women, she was excepted.

Certainly a lot of things were routinely denied women in Athens, like seeing the games, though that wasn't always the case, since one of Pindar's poems speaks of women swooning when they saw the athlete's performance.

[Lavan Tiri]

Yeah man! Napoleon was dynamite!

[Korouse]

The guy was a badass.

Of course he's good. Good at kicking ass.

[Russo-Byzantine Empire]

I don't know, what was Athens per than a slave economy whose women would be jealous of the level of freedom provided in Saudi Arabia?

Napoleon reintroduced slavery after it had been abolished by the Revolution, iirc.

I don't think women in Athens had any less freedom than they did in France, really. Napoleon hated women, and said they are merely the orchard of men that bear their fruit, and he applied very explicit double standards in law. Napoleon hated women so much that Josephine wrote him before and said some of the things she heard through rumor of him saying about women were very upsetting and to please stop, to which Napoleon replied that of anything he said of women, she was excepted.

Certainly a lot of things were routinely denied women in Athens, like seeing the games, though that wasn't always the case, since one of Pindar's poems speaks of women swooning when they saw the athlete's performance.

I am aware that Napoleon was quite sexist. So was all of society. There were double standards for women everywhere. I am also aware he reintroduced slavery, however slavery in France wasn't nearly as widespread as it was in Athens. Finally, Athens wasn't established by revolution.

[Conserative Morality]

I don't think women in Athens had any less freedom than they did in France, really.

What.

[Internationalist Bastard]

In my opinion, classic case of the dictators. Haiti kinda showed he really just wanted an empire

[Valaran]

I don't think women in Athens had any less freedom than they did in France, really.

ohh boy

The polis was incredibly restrictive on female freedom.

Not a defence of Napoleon, but there is a wide gulf between his personal vendettas, and what was institutionalised in Athens.

[Conserative Morality]

Bush's propaganda.
It's way easier to say that people don't wanna join your war because they are cowards who surrender as soon as they see an ennemy and need other to fight for them rather than to acknowledge that if they don't want to follow you, it's maybe because your motives or casus belli ain't right in the first place.

The false reputation predates Bush's election, much less the Iraq War.

[Morr]

Napoleon reintroduced slavery after it had been abolished by the Revolution, iirc.

I don't think women in Athens had any less freedom than they did in France, really. Napoleon hated women, and said they are merely the orchard of men that bear their fruit, and he applied very explicit double standards in law. Napoleon hated women so much that Josephine wrote him before and said some of the things she heard through rumor of him saying about women were very upsetting and to please stop, to which Napoleon replied that of anything he said of women, she was excepted.

Certainly a lot of things were routinely denied women in Athens, like seeing the games, though that wasn't always the case, since one of Pindar's poems speaks of women swooning when they saw the athlete's performance.

I am aware that Napoleon was quite sexist. So was all of society. There were double standards for women everywhere. I am also aware he reintroduced slavery, however slavery in France wasn't nearly as widespread as it was in Athens. Finally, Athens wasn't established by revolution.

Slavery in France wasn't as widespread because enslaving Christians had become a massive taboo in Europe ever since alternatives for taking care of unwanted kids arose, and that process started a thousand years before Napoleon's time. Slavery only became permissible again with the idea that Indians and blacks were less than human, and that was quite a controversy since the Valladolid debate. If there were blacks and Indians doing most of the work in France, that would have been fine with Napoleon, I'm sure.

[Morr]

I don't think women in Athens had any less freedom than they did in France, really.

ohh boy

The polis was incredibly restrictive on female freedom.

Not a defence of Napoleon, but there is a wide gulf between his personal vendettas, and what was institutionalised in Athens.

No doubt it was restrictive. I think what you're confused about is 19th Century Europe being any less restrictive in general in regard to wives and women still under the control of their fathers.

[Kubra]

I don't know, what was Athens per than a slave economy whose women would be jealous of the level of freedom provided in Saudi Arabia?

Napoleon reintroduced slavery after it had been abolished by the Revolution, iirc.

I don't think women in Athens had any less freedom than they did in France, really. Napoleon hated women, and said they are merely the orchard of men that bear their fruit, and he applied very explicit double standards in law. Napoleon hated women so much that Josephine wrote him before and said some of the things she heard through rumor of him saying about women were very upsetting and to please stop, to which Napoleon replied that of anything he said of women, she was excepted.

Certainly a lot of things were routinely denied women in Athens, like seeing the games, though that wasn't always the case, since one of Pindar's poems speaks of women swooning when they saw the athlete's performance.

the reintroduction of slavery by Napoleon was only in specific profitable colonies, not full reintroduction
It was still shady as fuck tho, like really fucking dirty how he did it,sent the colonies "reinforcements" with secret orders to bring back slavery

[Kubra]

Oh god fucking dammit, can we please stop being apologists for maniacal mass murderers? Yes, it was bad that Napoleon brought back slavery, and yes, it was good that Robespierre got rid of it, but seriously, the man was insane. He maintained an almost totalitarian grip on society, you could be killed for voicing you opinion, along with your whole family. Children were murdered just for being noble. Robespierre was not someone I would want within a universe of governance.

dude a ton more people died in napoleons campaigns than did in Robespierre's purges
Like way more
The worst mass murders are always the ones least spoken. Trotsky and derzhinsky joking about purges was in poor taste, but their kill counts were nothing compared to later genocidaires.

[Valaran]

ohh boy

The polis was incredibly restrictive on female freedom.

Not a defence of Napoleon, but there is a wide gulf between his personal vendettas, and what was institutionalised in Athens.

No doubt it was restrictive. I think what you're confused about is 19th Century Europe being any less restrictive in general in regard to wives and women still under the control of their fathers.

Somehow, I don't think I am confused on this. I was merely taking your post, which was mostly on Napoleon's personal thoughts.

Now, in regards to women in Athens, it was more restrictive. Almost no jobs were open to women (even less than in Europe), there were restrictions on even going outside, and they weren't even allowed at parties at their own homes (the exception being courtesans).

Compare this to actresses or ladies of some wealth in France. Not great, but still better.

(I am mainly focusing on the urban and middle classes with this - no doubt the poor in both areas lived in a much more similar fashion).

[Internationalist Bastard]

Oh god fucking dammit, can we please stop being apologists for maniacal mass murderers? Yes, it was bad that Napoleon brought back slavery, and yes, it was good that Robespierre got rid of it, but seriously, the man was insane. He maintained an almost totalitarian grip on society, you could be killed for voicing you opinion, along with your whole family. Children were murdered just for being noble. Robespierre was not someone I would want within a universe of governance.

dude a ton more people died in napoleons campaigns than did in Robespierre's purges
Like way more

Shhhh, wars don't count

[Morr]

Now, in regards to women in Athens, it was more restrictive. Almost no jobs were open to women (even less than in Europe),

In most cases besides being a courtesan, women working in Europe in this time gave all their money to their husband or father. Women were seldom paid a livable wage, as opposed to men, it was merely for supplementing the income of the guy of the household.

there were restrictions on even going outside, and they weren't even allowed at parties at their own homes (the exception being courtesans).

Women going outside had mainly to do with the man of the household objecting. Hipparchia lived the cynic lifestyle with her husband, which meant spending a lot of time outdoors. It was taboo for women to go around and make social calls and get-togethers, but it was far from illegal; so much is clear from all the poetry lauding women who don't do it as rare.

Compare this to actresses or ladies of some wealth in France. Not great, but still better.

Actresses in Europe were often seen as little better than courtesans, hence why they were banned from the stage back in the day.

Women of wealth in Greece had more freedom, too. Certainly Sappho did.

[Saint-Thor]

Fact: France has been the European's military and diplomatic powerhouse since the 9th century. Now, after one century of déchéance of it's military role from 1860 to 1960; France had took back it's place.

Eh? Someone is forgetting about the HRE and Byzantine Empire, which were considerably more powerful and influential in Europe at various points.

The HRE was a very loose confederation type of Empire. No central power and no commun imperial institution, made of semi-independent states, that could declare war on each other, sometimes taking sides of invaders and certainly competing against each other in various domains. The Emperors had no real control over imperial diet, ruling mostly the land they inherited (Habsburg in Austria and Bohemia, someone else in Bavaria, same for Brandenburg, etc.) The princes were practically free of Imperial control and could tell it to fuck off if needed. The only place where the HRE is considerably powerful is in a game of Crusader King II, because it takes for granted that every princes loves you, support you, hate the neighboring powers as much as you do, share your faith (everybody is catholic). In reality, this was not the case.

[Valaran]

In most cases besides being a courtesan, women working in Europe in this time gave all their money to their husband or father. Women were seldom paid a livable wage, as opposed to men, it was merely for supplementing the income of the guy of the household.

That is still more common than in Athens though. Most weren't even able to supplement their income at all.

Women going outside had mainly to do with the man of the household objecting.

These objections were fairly common, however.

all the poetry lauding women who don't do it as rare.

While poetry is a useful source, it presents a very warped picture - of a tiny literate elite who aren't necessarily talking about reality. Furthermore, there isn't even so much poetic evidence for female rights. If that's the bedrock of your evidence, I'd suggest casting a wider net - there are no female patrons in the inscriptions, no female politicians, almost no female greeks mentioned in the histories (and none given much mention), or the philosophies (Socrates is rather disdainful of his wife) - perhaps the only exception are the plays present a more nuanced picture, and certainly not the levels you are suggesting.

Actresses in Europe were often seen as little better than courtesans, hence why they were banned from the stage back in the day.

They didn't even exist in Greece.

Women of wealth in Greece had more freedom, too. Certainly Sappho did.

[/quote]

Sappho is a rather lone exception, in the same vein of Artemisia being equally so. Sappho is not representative, and examples that come even close to her are almost non-existent.

Women had no legal statehood in Athens, they were not considered full citizens, and her male guardians had total right to dispose of her property. France was better than this, albeit slightly.

You'd be better off using Rome as an example of relative freedom for women. Or at least not Athens.

[Gim]

The guy was a badass.

Of course he's good. Good at kicking ass.

He didn't. He killed his enemies through his soldiers firing guns at them.
He did not literally place his foot in the gluteal muscles of his enemies.

[Ganos Lao]

I will never understand how people came up with this "French just surrender lol" stereotype when for centuries, long before 1860, they were the nation in Europe.

I mean, French was a second language for many back then.

Bush's propaganda.
It's way easier to say that people don't wanna join your war because they are cowards who surrender as soon as they see an ennemy and need other to fight for them rather than to acknowledge that if they don't want to follow you, it's maybe because your motives or casus belli ain't right in the first place.

That's what I always figured was a significant reason for the stereotype. It's all just people being proud in their historical illiteracy.

[Napkiraly]

Eh? Someone is forgetting about the HRE and Byzantine Empire, which were considerably more powerful and influential in Europe at various points.

The HRE was a very loose confederation type of Empire. No central power and no commun imperial institution, made of semi-independent states, that could declare war on each other, sometimes taking sides of invaders and certainly competing against each other in various domains. The Emperors had no real control over imperial diet, ruling mostly the land they inherited (Habsburg in Austria and Bohemia, someone else in Bavaria, same for Brandenburg, etc.) The princes were practically free of Imperial control and could tell it to fuck off if needed.

In reality, neither is yours which is a gross simplification of the HRE's history which very much at various times had powerful Emperors and dynasties (Salian dynasty for example) that were able to keep the various lords in line. This is also overlooking that other states suffered from the same problem. France being one of them, as was Scotland. It's just that France moved towards centralization as the middle ages were drawing to a close while the HRE went in the opposite direction, and started becoming far more decentralized and the power of the Emperor increasingly diminishing. Which began after the end of the Hohenstaufen dynasty if my memory is correct. The HRE that you have in mind was a later political development during its history after the failure to begin centralizing away from the system common during the late Early and High Middle Ages. Of which France suffered the same, if not a worse case, than the HRE. It just ended up moving towards a system that was stronger while the HRE didn't.

[Revolutionary Republican France]

Obviously he was good, I mean come on!

[Gim]

Obviously he was good, I mean come on!

The fundamental fact of causing warfare makes a leader not good. Pacifism is the virtue of any nation or an empire.

[Morr]

Obviously he was good, I mean come on!

The fundamental fact of causing warfare makes a leader not good. Pacifism is the virtue of any nation or an empire.

Napoleon didn't cause most of the wars that he fought.