What is the /his/ view of Napoleon?
As a British person I think he shouldn't have been denied free travel within the British isles (As he was when he was captured, due to worries about his cause gaining popular cause among the peasants and such), because given what he believed in I feel he should have conquered the British isles.
The world would be a better place had we not won the Napoleonic wars desu.
Basically bunch of conservative inbred royals felt super threatened by the death of the french king and the desires of the new républic to make France great again and decided to invade. France fought back and rekt it's enemies. Napoleon is considered a war monger because of this. The eternally butthurt monarchies would never have accepted Napoleon as an equal and would continue to wage war until he was deposed and some bourbon shit was put on the throne of a crippled France.
In many ways Republican and empire France was born too early. Truly tragic.
Napoleon wasn't special. He fought mostly 70+ year old commanders in a time when the gutted French leadership meant that it would be easy for a nobody to rise up through the ranks.
Meh. Davout was better.
Napoleon was very well studied and was always two steps ahead. I doubt his military education was all that different from the 70+ year old commanders. To bring Napoleon down a notch because he beat them when they themselves had a whole lifetime to make the innovations Napoleon made in strategy isn't fair.
Not to mention these commanders probably didn't act alone and had advisers and aides.
Of course you're right about a nobody being able to rise up through the ranks because of the revolution. But he got to where he did based on merit, also he had good fortune. He got lucky Egypt didn't blow back. The fact is a nobody wouldn't have inspired his men like Napoleon did.
>what he believed in
I cannot believe people still believe Napoleon was a pure blooded republican by the end of his life. He literally made his relatives and himself monarchs and set up dynastic succession.
Napoleon actually tried to make himself legitimate in the eyes of other monarch by various means including marriage and papal decree. He was a hero for moving France away from the barbarism of the terror and revolution. His defeat actually helped liberalism in that there would never be a monarch supported by liberals again in France.
>have revolution to overthrow monarchy and grant ordinary plebs freedom
>nation took over by tyrant who proceeds to place close family members on thrones across Europe and abolish any semblance of democracy
>overthrow absolute monarchy established by Louis XIV who had undeniably reinforced france's position in Europe by transforming it from a feudal system to a proper monarchy
>put absolute regards in power who have absolutely no right to be there at all
>so called "republic" destroys all kind of opposition and becomes as much of a democracy as modern day china
>government chimps out and chops everyone's heads off, including great scientists such as Lavoisier
>finally get rid of Robespierre
>huge political instability, people have lost faith in their authority, they demand the return of the king
>reinstating a monarchy would lead to more conflict as the republicans would respond violently
>napoleon comes along, creates a system that suits both the republicans and the monarchists
>proceeds to conquer europe as well, nice bonus
>with pact with russia has virtually won, just needs to wait it out and England's economy will die, essentially making France the uncontested world power
>goes full sperg and attacks Russians
>proceeds to get insulted by anonymous on a mongolian calligraphy website
That guy better, little more and Europe could be moan as Amsterdam whore.