Napoleon was not an aggressor except against Russia and arguably Spain. In the other cases, he did not start fights; he finished them.
And he was not an aggressor at all against the peoples of Europe. He was an aggressor against the deeply conservative feudal nobility who were enemies of progress, reason, and efficiency. Napoleon was far more rationalist and humanist than everyone he fought against, except Britain.
You might need to add sources for this. I roll to disbelieve, and Claude seems to also think that while you can construct a narrative that might be technically true, it would be at best misleading.
Certainly Napoleon benefitted from people thinking he was for progress and reason. Many intellectuals elsewhere in Europe saw him that way… until he showed up in their country, pillaged the countryside, installed one of his brothers etc. as the new king, and brutally suppressed dissent. Then they tended to change their mind.
All of which was pretty far from anything the founders of the French Revolution thought they were trying to make happen, to bring it back to the point habryka was making in mentioning Napoleon.
I think an even clearer aspect is Napoleon’s behavior within France. He declared himself Emperor, complete with an elaborate coronation ceremony! Then he reintroduced a whole system of dukes, counts, and other titles of nobility. Definitely not what the revolutionaries had in mind when they overthrew the monarchy and declared the Republic.
Napoleon was not an aggressor except against Russia and arguably Spain. In the other cases, he did not start fights; he finished them.
And he was not an aggressor at all against the peoples of Europe. He was an aggressor against the deeply conservative feudal nobility who were enemies of progress, reason, and efficiency. Napoleon was far more rationalist and humanist than everyone he fought against, except Britain.
You might need to add sources for this. I roll to disbelieve, and Claude seems to also think that while you can construct a narrative that might be technically true, it would be at best misleading.
Certainly Napoleon benefitted from people thinking he was for progress and reason. Many intellectuals elsewhere in Europe saw him that way… until he showed up in their country, pillaged the countryside, installed one of his brothers etc. as the new king, and brutally suppressed dissent. Then they tended to change their mind.
All of which was pretty far from anything the founders of the French Revolution thought they were trying to make happen, to bring it back to the point habryka was making in mentioning Napoleon.
I think an even clearer aspect is Napoleon’s behavior within France. He declared himself Emperor, complete with an elaborate coronation ceremony! Then he reintroduced a whole system of dukes, counts, and other titles of nobility. Definitely not what the revolutionaries had in mind when they overthrew the monarchy and declared the Republic.