# Is Napoleon regarded as an admirable figure or a villain? Or controversial yet? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 24, 2011, 7:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-napoleon-regarded-as-an-admirable-figure-or-a-villain-or-controversial-yet/572430 "2011-02-24T07:59:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2011, 8:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-napoleon-regarded-as-an-admirable-figure-or-a-villain-or-controversial-yet/572430/21 "2011-02-25T08:41:04Z")
> [@Koxinga](#): > > Appreciate that – I guess it then might be a case of Napoleon being judged by current values, Historical figures are always judged on ‘current values’. When he was in charge he was near-holy. After the restauration he was reviled on a level with Hitler and bonapartists were persecuted. With a new Empire he became a glorious figure again and then remained a national hero up until recently. For a lot of people he still is a Great Man, but times are again changing. Dictators are not as much accepted any more and even the picture of a long time Geat Man like Ceasar, is under revision. Didn’t he want to kill the Republic and become a king? > [@](#): > > fairly or unfairly, as we see him inhabiting the age when kings weren’t calling the shots any more (in the Anglosphere, at least). Uhmm, come again? He was about the _only_ non-king head of state! Everybody else still had monarchs. That was the whole reason behind all the Napoleonic wars. _Napoleon_ wanted peace but the monarchs feared the French Revolution might spread. A non-monarchic France could not be tollerated. > [@](#): > > Also, he had the outward appearance of a more modern leader in terms of organization and technology. Alexander personally throwing himself out to the front of his troops with a sword, well and good, but Napoleon sipping sherry in the back directing the movements of a early version of the Wehrmacht, not so good. What are you trying to convey with this? ---
**Author:** ![Koxinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/4af34b/32.png) [@Koxinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Koxinga)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2011, 8:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-napoleon-regarded-as-an-admirable-figure-or-a-villain-or-controversial-yet/572430/22 "2011-02-25T08:48:53Z")
> [@Latro](#): > > He was about the _only_ non-king head of state! > Everybody else still had monarchs. Well . . . not _[everybody](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbRom1Rz8OA)_. And even the Brits had the limited monarchy thing going on, what with George III talking to trees and all that. > [@](#): > > What are you trying to convey with this? Pretty much what I said, the fact that Napoleon appeared to be in control of a _modern_ apparatus of state might lead (some of us, fairly or unfairly) to judge him on more modern terms. > [@](#): > > Historical figures are always judged on ‘current values’. No, they’re not, at least not by anyone writing seriously & worth reading. ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2011, 9:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-napoleon-regarded-as-an-admirable-figure-or-a-villain-or-controversial-yet/572430/23 "2011-02-25T09:05:37Z")
> [@Koxinga](#): > > Well . . . not _[everybody](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbRom1Rz8OA)_. And even the Brits had the limited monarchy thing going on, what with George III talking to trees and all that. The America’s were an irrelevant backwater, far far away. > [@](#): > > Pretty much what I said, the fact that Napoleon appeared to be in control of a _modern_ apparatus of state might lead (some of us, fairly or unfairly) to judge him on more modern terms. Ah, OK. I see. But that’s rather the issue, isn’t it? _We_ see France as a more modern nation. Ahead of it’s neighbors on science, organisation and statehood. But now it’s even more modern not to have dictators, and thus we are starting to see him more as a kind of Saddam Hussein or a Khadaffy. > [@](#): > > No, they’re not, at least not by anyone writing seriously & worth reading. Historians are children of their times too. Having ‘new insights’ in a bit of accepted history, is exactly what makes interresting articles. But yes, as a rule, writers of history books should do their utmost to remain neutral. ---
**Author:** ![casdave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c6cbf5/32.png) [@casdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/casdave)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2011, 9:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-napoleon-regarded-as-an-admirable-figure-or-a-villain-or-controversial-yet/572430/24 "2011-02-25T09:40:14Z")
> [@](#): > > Nor do I often hear about William the Bastard being a shit Still reviled in the North of England. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2011, 9:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-napoleon-regarded-as-an-admirable-figure-or-a-villain-or-controversial-yet/572430/25 "2011-02-25T09:45:19Z")
> [@Latro](#): > > Uhmm, come again? > He was about the _only_ non-king head of state! > Everybody else still had monarchs. That was the whole reason behind all the Napoleonic wars. _Napoleon_ wanted peace but the monarchs feared the French Revolution might spread. A non-monarchic France could not be tollerated.? You realize this is Emperor Napoleon we’re talking about, right? ---
**Author:** ![Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kolak_of_twilo/32/73_2.png) [@Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kolak_of_Twilo)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2011, 10:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-napoleon-regarded-as-an-admirable-figure-or-a-villain-or-controversial-yet/572430/26 "2011-02-25T10:46:46Z")
In college I remember being suprised when a friend who was Belgian called him a fascist. Whether you agree with that assessment or not, I think it would be fair to say he was a militaristic dictator. ---
**Author:** ![Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/cc9497/32.png) [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capt.Ridley_s_Shooting_Party)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2011, 11:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-napoleon-regarded-as-an-admirable-figure-or-a-villain-or-controversial-yet/572430/27 "2011-02-25T11:52:09Z")
> [@casdave](#): > > Still reviled in the North of England. Yep. Carried out a genocide in the North of England with the Harrying of the North and subsequent scorched earth policy. Arguably its effects are still seen today. ---
**Author:** ![Khaki\_Campbell](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/9de053/32.png) [@Khaki\_Campbell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Khaki_Campbell)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2011, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-napoleon-regarded-as-an-admirable-figure-or-a-villain-or-controversial-yet/572430/28 "2011-02-25T12:31:53Z")
> [@Kolak\_of\_Twilo](#): > > In college I remember being suprised when a friend who was Belgian called him a fascist. Leftist bigots call anything less left from them “fascist”. ---
**Author:** ![NDP](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ndp/32/55_2.png) [@NDP](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NDP)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2011, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-napoleon-regarded-as-an-admirable-figure-or-a-villain-or-controversial-yet/572430/29 "2011-02-25T18:41:18Z")
> [@Kolak\_of\_Twilo](#): > > In college I remember being suprised when a friend who was Belgian called him a fascist. Whether you agree with that assessment or not, I think it would be fair to say he was a militaristic dictator. Napoleon was not a fascist because fascism didn’t exist yet. However, some historians have argued that many aspects of Napoleon’s governance paved the way for the totalitarian states of Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini and that the only reason Napoleon didn’t exert such oppressive control over his citizenry was because the technology that later made totalitarian rule possible (e.g., mass media, transportation, and industry) wasn’t developed. ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2011, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-napoleon-regarded-as-an-admirable-figure-or-a-villain-or-controversial-yet/572430/30 "2011-02-25T18:47:25Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > You realize this is Emperor Napoleon we’re talking about, right? You realize an emperor is something else than a king, right? That’s why we have seperate words for them. ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2011, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-napoleon-regarded-as-an-admirable-figure-or-a-villain-or-controversial-yet/572430/31 "2011-02-25T18:52:52Z")
Of course, in practice, it doesn’t make that much difference to the peasants. Espescially when an emperorship becomes heridatary. To a “noble” king from an established family, a Napoleon is just a revolutionary upstart. Napoleon did his best to get himself acknowledged as an equal, amongst the noble houses of europe. They would not have it though. ---
**Author:** ![Regallag\_The\_Axe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/regallag_the_axe/32/445_2.png) [@Regallag\_The\_Axe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Regallag_The_Axe)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2011, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-napoleon-regarded-as-an-admirable-figure-or-a-villain-or-controversial-yet/572430/32 "2011-02-25T19:14:26Z")
> [@Latro](#): > > You realize an emperor is something else than a king, right? > That’s why we have seperate words for them. When I look up ‘emperor’ in my dictionary here\* the relevant definition is: ‘The ruler of an empire, having power either absolute or subject to constitutional restrictions.’ When I look up ‘king’, the relevant definition is: ‘A male monarch.’ Looking up monarch gives us: ‘1. A sole and absolute ruler of a state. 2. A sovereign, such as a king or emperor. 3. One that presides over or rules.’ I see little practical difference between the two words. \*Houghton Mifflin’s The American Heritage Dictionary, New College Edition ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2011, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-napoleon-regarded-as-an-admirable-figure-or-a-villain-or-controversial-yet/572430/33 "2011-02-25T19:21:56Z")
> [@Latro](#): > > You realize an emperor is something else than a king, right? > That’s why we have seperate words for them. I dunno. What differentiates Nappy from any other usurper of a throne (or in his case, a whole series of 'em?) ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2011, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-napoleon-regarded-as-an-admirable-figure-or-a-villain-or-controversial-yet/572430/34 "2011-02-25T19:39:13Z")
You did read my second, qualifying post? I guess the Idea of nobility/aristocracy is very foreign to you. The difference is, as I said not too big. To us. To a nobleman the difference is huge. An aristocrat is born an aristocrat, anyone else is beneath them. A king is _born_ to be king. He is of royal blood, ordained by God. A usurper is someone who has no _right_ to the throne. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2011, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-napoleon-regarded-as-an-admirable-figure-or-a-villain-or-controversial-yet/572430/35 "2011-02-25T23:23:34Z")
[QUOTE=Latro] Everybody else still had monarchs. [/QUOTE] Nope, the Netherlands and Venice were Republics, and had been so longer than France. Coincidentally, both were also constantly being invaded and attacked by their neighbouring monarchies. England had no less than four major wars with the Netherlands in the span of a century. They even allied with France (who was still a monarchy at the time), of all nations. That’s how you know they really couldn’t fucking stand the Dutch 😃 > [@Latro](#): > > ``` > Of course, in practice, it doesn't make that much difference to the peasants. > > ``` Of course it does. Not only does it put the very foundation of the social order into question, but it also means that _anyone_ can become king/emperor. All you have to do is have the balls to seize the throne. In a very real way, Nappy was inspirational in the same way Eminem or Michael Jordan are today: sure, only one kid out of a hundred thousand is going to make it big and leave the ghetto behind. But every last one of those hundred thousand thinks _it could be them_. Dreams and hopes go a long way, even if day-to-day life remains the same. In a more realistic sense, Napoleon’s meritocratic system (or at least partially meritocratic, since he wasn’t above a lil’ bit of nepotism here and there, there, there, also thataway but that hardly counts) was a fantastic idea at the time, in the literal sense of the word. Imagine getting social status, fame and a fat wad of cash based on your talents and hard work rather than just because you’re some degenerate, inbred streak of piss born under the right stars. Madness ! That’s the kind of thing that threatens to give the proles the idea they get to be all uppity and socially mobile. Could even give them a sense of self-worth, make them clamour for social justice, all that jazz. Very bad precedent. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-napoleon-regarded-as-an-admirable-figure-or-a-villain-or-controversial-yet/572430.md?page=1)