Blood Thirsty Or For His Country? (Napolean)

Essay by PaperNerd ContributorCollege, Undergraduate January 2002

download word file, 2 pages 5.0

Downloaded 10 times

Napoleon Bonaparte is one of the most misunderstood Emperor of his time.

People always view him as either a blood thirsty villain or a good doing man who brought freedom to France after the Bourbon Dynasty. I agree that he caused a lot of deaths during his time, but I think he did it for his country and not the full enjoyment of war. He was a military genius and I think he should be celebrated for uniting France like he did.

Napoleon was devoted to his people and always did what was best for them. "In a book that became popular classic in France, Napoleon depicted himself as the Son of the Revolution, the man who eliminated the relics of feudalism in France, who restored order, and who forced peace upon the monarchs who hated France, and the Revolution.

He was a man of great genius, upon whom fate smiled, but nevertheless, "˜a man of the people.'

Always he was devoted to the cause of emancipating mankind from the chains of monarchial absolution. He took credit for consolidating the possession of liberty and equality." (The Making"¦343) I totally agree that these were his key intentions, and he didn't want France to suffer, but the total opposite; and that was to make it a stronger and more concrete society.

Napoleon was one of the most profound war geniuses in history of the world.

War was to Napoleon as a basketball game as to Michael Jordan. It was of the finest arts to him and no one understood it as he did. He took painstaking care in planning the battles, and made sure he knew everything about the opposing army. He would put them through the most unfavorable positions and weaken them, and then when the time was...