Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > European History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old April 3rd, 2011, 05:00 AM   #41
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Sep 2010
From: Somewhere in the former First French Empire
Posts: 3,538

And to be honest are the Napoleonic wars not just an amazing chapter in History. With flags, drum, splendid uniforms.

I don't know if you ever watched the movie Waterloo. Well I get the chills when you see thousands of French soldiers move forward with "La Victoire est a Nous" on the background and yelling Vive L'Empereur!

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCsXLCRR3NQ"]YouTube - Battle of waterloo part4[/ame] 6:30
jeroenrottgering is offline  
Remove Ads
Old April 3rd, 2011, 03:39 PM   #42

Albanian Paradox's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 437

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wastedgrunt36 View Post
The threat of Revolution, as if it was a bad thing, was over by 1799.
One could argue that the threat of Revolution spreading was over earlier than 1799. Maybe even over by 1795?
Albanian Paradox is offline  
Old April 3rd, 2011, 03:42 PM   #43

Pancho35's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2010
From: Newfoundland
Posts: 1,946

The Napoleonic Wars were a result of that French tyrant's villainous empire building.
Pancho35 is offline  
Old April 3rd, 2011, 03:54 PM   #44
Archivist
 
Joined: Nov 2010
From: england
Posts: 205

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeroenrottgering View Post
I don't know if you ever watched the movie Waterloo. Well I get the chills when you see thousands of French soldiers move forward with "La Victoire est a Nous" on the background and yelling Vive L'Empereur!

YouTube - Battle of waterloo part4 6:30
waterloo is a great movie. christopher plummer is brilliant as wellington and rob steiger is brilliant as napoleon. depicts the grandeur of the french advance very well and it must have taken a lot of courage for the inexperienced allied soldiers, to stand their ground against that kind of advance
general.wolfe is offline  
Old April 3rd, 2011, 06:07 PM   #45

Nemowork's Avatar
Teflon Soul
 
Joined: Jan 2011
From: South of the barcodes
Posts: 7,900

If you miss out the dodgy acting by the main characters who are pretending to be riding on horses while theyre actually on barrels.

Great for spectacle though.
Nemowork is offline  
Old April 3rd, 2011, 06:09 PM   #46

Pancho35's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2010
From: Newfoundland
Posts: 1,946

Boy I have to check it out, I heard it was poorly done but I guess that was only in the eyes of your average stiff movie critic.
Pancho35 is offline  
Old April 3rd, 2011, 06:09 PM   #47
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,933

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeroenrottgering View Post
He was born as a son of an aristocrat. He rose to the position of Emperor and so he should be called that way. And well I think they were liberating because after him all feudal systems in Continental Europe felled. Church and state were separated and every citizen was equal for the law.
Calling the lawyer Carlo Buonaparte an aristocrat was a bit far fetched; in any case, as you can see the family surname was Buonaparte.

The French feudal system was destroyed by the Revolution, not Monsieur Buonaparte. Out of France, the feudal system persisted all along the Napoleonic Europe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeroenrottgering View Post
Come on you know your self that he didn't slaughtered people. The powers of Europe invaded his territory and so he needed men to oppose them. As long as Europe left him alone then Napoleon didn't had to conscript that many man. Exploited in what way? The continental system? Well yes but England could lift that in a matter of seconds by just keeping to the treaty of Amiens. Furthermore he may have halted Naval trade but in that way boosted the industry.
Come on, I simply can't imagine your sources; the extensive economic exploitation in any possible way and the slaughtering of the enemy (often including civil population) and of course his own soldiers were the rule under the Napoleonic saga that you seem to find so attractive.

The Treaty of Amiens has been analyzed in detail above; Monsieur Buonaparte broke it first.

Click the image to open in full size.

And of course, not all were "flags, drum, splendid uniforms. "; in fact, for the vast majority of the European people it was more like the image above.

Yup, Waterloo is a nice picture; it's nice because the obvious immense human suffering from that nice battle is almost entirely ignored.
Almost 50,000 died just because Monsieur Buonaparte escaped from Elba; naturally, just a tiny fraction of the colossal death toll paid for the personal ambition of a single man.
sylla1 is offline  
Old April 3rd, 2011, 06:13 PM   #48

Pancho35's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2010
From: Newfoundland
Posts: 1,946

The British did break the Treaty of Amiens but we sure well couldn't let Bony get away with his evil schemes and plans for world domination now could we? It was merely a breathing space.
Pancho35 is offline  
Old April 3rd, 2011, 07:19 PM   #49

Cedar Brown's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Oct 2009
From: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 831

I don't see how France broke the Treaty of Amiens. The Treaty of Luneville is a treaty signed between France and another country. It doesn't have anything to do with the Treaty of Amiens. The peace wasn't broken until British ships started attacking and capturing French vessels. Until then none of the terms had explicitally been broken by either side. They just hadn't been carried out yet since neither side was trusting enough to give ground.


Napoleon invaded Austria in 1805 to destroy the armies that were massing against France. The next year he invaded Prussia which had refused to remain neutral. Then he finished off the Russians the next year. The coalition on land finished, every other campaign afterwards was intended to ultimately bring down Britain, the instigator of every coalition against France. Britain simply wasn't going to stand for a single strong power on the continent because it would threaten it's own hegemonic aspirations.

Look at a map of the British Empire and see how much of the world is covered in red. Pfft. villianous empire building.


If I had to live 200 years ago, I'd much rather live in a country that Napoleon had passed through. His reforms were extensive. I think it's ironic how Napoleon is compared to Hitler while the former emancipated the Jews from their ghettos and the latter built them back up again. The so called "Tyrant" was crowned by the people. He had rebuilt France from the ashes of the revolution. He was the first stable government for the country in over a decade. They wanted to keep him and a good way to do that is to make him Emperor. The government bodies agreed, the people agreed too.
Cedar Brown is offline  
Old April 3rd, 2011, 07:59 PM   #50

Bismarck's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2009
From: rangiora
Posts: 2,847

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cedar Brown View Post
...
If I had to live 200 years ago, I'd much rather live in a country that Napoleon had passed through. His reforms were extensive. I think it's ironic how Napoleon is compared to Hitler while the former emancipated the Jews from their ghettos and the latter built them back up again. The so called "Tyrant" was crowned by the people. He had rebuilt France from the ashes of the revolution. He was the first stable government for the country in over a decade. They wanted to keep him and a good way to do that is to make him Emperor. The government bodies agreed, the people agreed too.
I think Britain would have been the best european country to live in at this time. However, if you were stuck on the continent and were able to evade military service, then French-controlled territory would have been the most tolerant and just. There's no doubt Napoleon was a tyrant, but when compared to other tyrants of history he is a remarkably balanced and enlightened human being. He was fortunate in the fact that many of the ideals of the French Revolution were deeply embedded in the psyche of ordinary europeans, which obliged him to embrace them as well. Thus, he was seen by many as the great liberator, and in many cases he did liberate them from old traditions and superstitions. Of course, not all were happy with this and it was usually from those with the most to lose. If the most severe criticisms of him are those that can also be levelled at other European monarchies, whose soldiers behaved just as reprehensibly as Napoleon's, then they are no criticisms at all, for they do not distinguish him from his co-rulers.
Bismarck is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > European History

Tags
ambition, british, fault, napoleonic, wars



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lusitania Sinking-Who's at fault? Heidi XX War and Military History 77 January 25th, 2014 03:54 PM
Advice needed on English soldiers in the Napoleonic Wars MissH European History 3 January 8th, 2011 01:09 AM
Leading intellectuals/figures of the Napoleonic Wars A7X European History 4 June 25th, 2010 06:30 PM
napoleonic wars piet hein War and Military History 8 June 28th, 2008 01:12 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.