When first looking at the Chronicle of the French Occupation, it looks as if it is merely a depiction of Napoleon's time in Egypt, however there is much more to this article than meets the eye. The article being written by an Egyptian and not a European provides an alternative viewpoint to the events that happened in Egypt as opposed to the accounts that have been read and taught by Europeans. Although the article is a different perspective it does show strong cultural bias and ethnocentrism towards the French people from the eyes of the Egyptians. The article shows bias in the tone it is written, the unkindness used to mock the French and the incomplete tales of the battles that took place.
The writings of Al-Jabarti show
…show more content…
In the writings Al-Jabarti states that the French do not see eye to eye with any religion whole-heartedly but agree with parts of three different ones. He does not comment much on the way they act or on their persons but just on the things that his culture does not agree with. Al-Jabarti even goes so far as to ridicule or criticize Napoleon's name by saying that it is not even a name but giving its literal definition. In doing this, he is simply mocking Napoleon and making him out to be a fool and less of a great leader.
In this section of his writings Al-Jabarti corrects Napoleon's grammar and spelling in his Proclamation to the Egyptians. In between the corrections of grammar Al-Jabarti insults the French by saying things such as "It's occurrence here is like animal droppings on the road or a boulder in a mountain pass, may god afflict the man who composed it with break-bone fever and may god expose him to all sorts of destruction." (Al-Jabarti, 30) This comment is not necessary and is just to degrade the French in any way he can. This shows that his writings are biased and show a one sided or slanted point of view, hinting that the French are inferior to the Egyptians. He continues with this and criticizes the French system of government and that it is uncivilized for them to have a political body instead of a ruler, which would control all. This system is simply different to their own but the tone in which it is written shows
There is no question in the fact that Napoleon Bonaparte was a significant character in France. However, there have been debates among historians for years around the central question: “Was Napoleon Bonaparte a hero or a villain?” The answer here relies on how one looks upon the situation. Was Napoleon Bonaparte a savior to the French, or was he a tyrant to the French? Although many historians’ answers do rely deeply onto perspective, their answers also lie within which stage of life Napoleon Bonaparte was in, as well as the shift in opinions that come as time changes. Paul Stock and Phillip Dwyer analyze Napoleon Bonaparte’s influence and through the analysis, debate on whether Napoleon Bonaparte should be considered a hero or a villain,
On the other hand, Napoleon provided the people of France with the Napoleonic Code and therefore freedom and justice; as he wasn’t particularly religious people could not confuse this act for selfishness it was obviously to make the people of France truly happy.
Napoleon Bonaparte is sometimes viewed as a democratic reformer, the views he expressed to give people this image was a complete lie. In a letter Napoleon sent to his brother after defeating the Prussians, Bonaparte says that he believes in public trials along with liberty, equality, and prosperity. These statements are the ideas of the French Revolution and what he told the citizens of France that he believed in. These ideas are what a democratic reformer would believe in and what made him popular during the revolution among the people. These viewpoints he expressed in this letter are not those of which he gave to the people of France. In December of 1812 Bonaparte said to other European monarchs, “Since I have worn a crown I have shown clearly enough that I mean to close the door on revolution. The sovereigns of Europe are indebted to me for stopping the revolutionary storm that threatened their thrones.” With these words he proves that he has no intention of giving the people of France a democracy and that he plans to stop the revolution. The belief that Napoleon Bonaparte is a democratic reformer is based solely on his words and not his action, making them lies to his people.
This document speaks to how in many ways they put Napoleon on a pedestal and how he took this view in order to gain more power. The purpose of this document is to show Napoleon as a more godly figure and to move him into the view of an absolute ruler. This helps to show how Napoleon betrayed the legacy of the French revolution by taking on an absolute
The French Revolution was a period of social and political turmoil in France from 1789 to 1799 that greatly affected modern and French history. It marked the decline of powerful monarchies and the rise of democracy, individual rights and nationalism. This revolution came with many consequences because of the strive for power and wealth, but also had many influential leaders attempting to initiate change in the French government and the economy. In 1789 the people of France dismissed King Louis XVI of his title, took apart his monarchy and executed him, his wife Marie Antoinette and thousands of nobles. The French set up a new system of government with specific revolutionary ideals, including liberty, equality and fraternity. This was a
In conclusion, Napoleon has done things that I believe are villainous and therefore he is a villain. The people of France wanted change and some sense of leadership after the revolution and that is what Napoleon could give them. Unfortunately he began to show the signs of a villain and forgot about the principles of the revolution, was blinded by power, and overestimated his abilities as the leader of an empire and an army. Had people realized earlier he was not going to be the great change they wanted and hoped for it may have saved them from his
In order to investigate the claim that ‘Napoleon betrayed the revolution’, it has to be determined what is the French revolution? And what are the revolutionary ideals that Napoleon allegedly betrayed? If Napoleon betrayed the Revolution then he betrayed the ideals of liberty, equality and fraternity. However if Napoleon did not betray the revolution, he consolidated the revolutionary ideals. The only way of determining whether Napoleon consolidated or betrayed the revolution is to explore his actions such as his military success, Dictatorship and social reforms. The difficulty of this analysis is that Napoleons motives for his actions determine whether he consolidated or betrayed the Revolution.
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
With all the glory and the splendour that some countries may have experienced, never has history seen how only only one man, Napoleon, brought up his country France from its most tormented status, to the very pinnacle of its height in just a few years time. He was a military hero who won splendid land-based battles, which allowed him to dominate most of the European continent. He was a man with ambition, great self-control and calculation, a great strategist, a genius; whatever it was, he was simply the best. But, even though how great this person was, something about how he governed France still floats among people 's minds. Did he abuse his power? Did Napoleon defeat the purpose of the ideals of the French Revolution? After all of his success in his military campaigns, did he gratify the people 's needs regarding their ideals on the French Revolution? This is one of the many controversies that we have to deal with when studying Napoleon and the French Revolution. In this essay, I will discuss my opinion on whether or not was he a destroyer of the ideals of the French Revolution.
The enlightenment was a time of great learning throughout Europe during the eighteenth century. Although the period is significant for scientific and other scholastic advancements, it is most important because it allowed for the opening of great minds—such as that of Napoleon Bonaparte. Shortly after this enlightenment made its way through Europe, revolution and civil war ripped through France between 1879 and 1899. The unrest of the time called for a strong ruler. A man/woman with an open mind and an enlightened soul. France needed a child of the enlightenment to sew its tattered flag. Napoleon Bonaparte was a child of the enlightenment. This was displayed in both his attitudes and
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
Not only did Napoleon take control of neighboring countries to France, but he forced his administration, specifically the Napoleonic code, on them as well. When instituting the Napoleonic code, many people rejoiced over the enlightened ideas it spread and freedom it promoted. However, most, if not all of Napoleon’s positive reforms were done so with negative intentions or a counter force in mind. For instance, Napoleon restricted all information in and out of France that viewed him negatively or could potentially obstruct the submissive society he built. In fact, plays, newspapers, and books were censored, which kept his citizens in the dark. The deceit continued when Napoleon promised freedom for all people, but went back on his word once it was no longer convenient for him. For example, Napoleon was facing many
The French Revolution began as an expression of rebellion against centuries of absolute rule in France. After an interim of experimental liberalism under the rule of Jacobins and Girondins and then the infamous reign of terror, the people of French were drawn to a man who promised them a return to stability, and honor through the expansion of empire. France and it’s people had long yearned for this sens eof honour, it had seemed, and could finally sens eit in a lasting rpesence under the rule of their prodigious, unbeatable general, Napoleon Bonaparte. He would soon take the reigns of civil government as well and become yet another Absolutist ruler, yet this