How Is Napoleon A Tyrant

Napoleon liked attention and was self centered. Not only did he like attention, but he also liked people seeing him in control. Napoleon considered himself to be superior. An example being, “Since I have worn the crown I have shown clearly enough…” (doc 7).

Napoleon Bonaparte is one of history’s most known figures. Napoleon Bonaparte was a hero to all people of France. Napoleon did a lot to help the people of France out with keeping the country safe. He also agreed with the French Revolution. Before Napoleon it was chaotic, and terrible.

Napoleon had great military ability and leadership skills, these abilities led him to become Emperor of France in 1804 and modernize the nation after the revolution1. There are many positive points that can lead people to believe he was a hero of France, but for every one of those points there are negatives that lead us to believe he was a villain of Europe. Napoleon was not absolutely good or absolutely bad which makes it difficult to argue either side, but I believe in the case of Napoleon the bad outweighs the good, which is why I would put him as a 3 on a hero villain continuum. His villainous side appears if we look at the Napoleonic code, the continental system, dropping revolutionary ideas, and over estimating his military ability.

Napoleon promoted numerous policies which reflected an enlightened perspective. Within the Napoleonic Code. Napoleon supported equality for all men under the law, which is a concept

Napoleon Bonaparte, an influential leader of France, was a man of many facets. On one the one hand, Napoleon was a strong leader who created durable institutions and strengthened France, but on the other, there is a more pitiful view of Napoleon. The view of Napoleon was initially very positive: he viewed himself as a protector of the people, and the people saw this too; however, over time, this image was greatly worsened, due to military hardship.

Although it is often debated, the character of Napoleon was neither strictly tyrannical or heroic. Connelly understood this and displayed both sides of Napoleon throughout the book. For example, Napoleon made a great impact on the education system in France that is still evident today. He founded lycèes, collèges, and the Imperial University that allowed those that wanted an education to receive it, sometimes with the help of scholarships (Connelly, 49). However, he did have an ulterior motive driving his work in education: as Napoleon put it, the “means of directing political and moral opinion” (Connelly, 51). Connelly points out that Napoleon was upfront about his motives, and says, “In education, Napoleon’s influence is often decried, but he left a lasting legacy” (Connelly, 49). Fortunately, the same can be said for many of Napoleon’s other endeavors, including his impact on culture. Napoleon enjoyed the arts and had a great influence on what the French people accepted. He reorganized France’s National Library, shaped the Louvre into the phenomenal museum it is today, patronized famous artists, and supported many scientists during that time (Connelly, 52-53). “Repression of political expression there was. But those who say Napoleon created an intellectual desert in France and Europe are wrong” (Connelly, 54). Misconceptions about Napoleon’s work in France have run rampant for years. While some truth lies in

Napoleons’ rise to emperor in France was indisputable mostly because of his overthrow of the Directory. His success’s as commander of the French army in Italy, only led to his aspiring status change to “Emperor” of France after overthrowing the Directory in November of 1799. His undying ambition for expansion of the empire he was creating however would be his undoing. Napoleons rule as emperor of France was quit spectacular actually and many admired and adored him as ruler. His ways were very appealing, and as a speaker he was very persuasive and admired by most of his people until his later years in his fall and demise. However, Napoleon did not seriously adhere to the ideals of the French Revolution, he did that of the Enlightenment but his undying ambition and character as “Emperor” undermined the true need of the French Revolution.

Napoleon Bonaparte will remain in the heart of many French nationals as one of the greatest military leaders that the nation has had when it comes to warfare history. In 1799, Napoleon launched a series of wars, which historian call, “Napoleonic wars” in a bid to extend the territory of France in Europe. Many historians argue that the Napoleonic wars were a continuation of the earlier war under the tag, French revolution in 1789. The French revolution in itself had so many influences in Europe, especially with the armies who felt the greatest impact of the revolution. The revolution brought with it many changes, especially in the production of modern mass weapons with the conscription in place. The new improvements in weaponry made Napoleon seek hegemony in the entire Europe sparking his quest to expand and increase the revolutionary and territorial borders of France. Napoleon, Corsican aristocrat, who was a minor, rose to the position of emperor in France because of the revolution and his idea was to sweep the entire Europe with the reforms brought about by the revolution (Dwyer 32). The idea was to liberate the continent so that all citizens had a chance to take the helm of leadership and do away with the issue of kinship rule. Napoleon was a symbol of change, and although at some point, he comes out as a dictator, he was progressive and created rationalization of governance and all the social

Napoleon build roads/bridges, codified the laws, reduced the independence of the church, ensure that the people have their natural rights, freedom of religious worship, promote education, and enforce the law equally. Napoleon was not trying to gain power for himself, but for his country. He built roads and bridges so that trade could be easier with other countries. Over 20,000 miles of imperial and 12,000 miles of regional roads were completed.

Napoleon was a military leader who took control of France after the revolution. When he decided to come to Egypt, he did not rule like a dictator or a tyrant; he actually gave Egyptian citizens some freedom and rights. For example, he supported our religion. Napoleon, when he came to Egypt, changed or improved our society economically and culturally. Some people think Napoleon was somehow a hero and some as a tyrant.

Creating a religious establishment loyal to him and below the state, whereas in other countries, the church had equal standing as the state. While other European nations promoted careers based on bloodlines and social status, Napoleon employed the best commanders and leaders France had to offer, regardless of birth. Previously mentioned François Joseph Lefebvre and Joachim Murat were only two of the prominent members of the Napoleonic Empire’s common born ruling elite (Wright 41). Creating a ruling class and army based on merit was unheard of in the 19th century, Napoleon pioneered careers and promotions based on talent as other nations came to realize the disadvantage they had facing Napoleon. Napoleon was also unique in his goals, he did not want to maintain European balance of power, he wanted French hegemony over Europe (Bell 70), and was the one of the few who came close to creating a pan-European empire.

Napoleon had already been marked as a prominent pig because he had a reputation of getting things his own way. By being active in the debates, he received much attention and notice from the animals. He also garnered support from those who agreed with his views but were unable to express themselves. Thus, he became a representative of these animals.

Napoleon’s political ideas were efficient and worked well to rule a country; he even adapted his ideas to help France run more efficiently. The Napoleonic Code gave equality to all male citizens and he rehabilitated the Catholic Church for his people, despite his belief in religious freedom. He created a bureaucracy with subprefects, prefects, and mayors that ran France. All of these ideas helped France run smoothly.

Napoleon was a man who had reformed france into something that it wouldn’t have wanted to happen 10 years before he took over in a military coup and ruled by dictatorship. In the eyes of many of the French he was a hero, he

There is a general consensus amongst historians about Napoleon’s intelligence and his ability to inspire and guide his troops with immense skill. As Michael Broers comments: “it is when historians deny him genius, creative power and acute intelligence, that they fail in their task.” Historians also agree that the French Revolution of 1789 played a critical role in Napoleon’s life by shaping his future aspirations. However, in spite of this broad agreement, there are varying views about how he used his genius in his rise to power. Historians tend to take two sides in their scrutiny of Napoleon as ruler. He is either seen as a saviour, a leader who would preserve the revolution, or a tyrant, a man who saw an opportunity to further his place in the world with the use of