"Napoleon the Great" Topic

"It has become all too common for Napoleon Bonaparte's biographers to approach him as a figure to be reviled, bent on world domination, practically a proto-Hitler. Here, after years of study extending even to visits paid to St Helena and 53 of Napoleon's 56 battlefields, Andrew Roberts has created a true portrait of the mind, the life, and the military and above all political genius of a fundamentally constructive ruler. This is the Napoleon, Roberts reminds us, whose peacetime activity produced countless indispensable civic innovations – and whose Napoleonic Code provided the blueprint for civil law systems still in use around the world today. It is one of the greatest lives in world history, which here has found its ideal biographer. The sheer enjoyment which this book will give anyone who loves history is enormous"

See here
link

Amicalement
Armand

It might be interesting to see how a book called 'Napoleon the Great' can reconcile his political genius as a ruler of France (which I have no argument with) with his utter inability to seek peace on anything other than his own terms, which seems (among other things) to have involved insisting on thrones for the rest of his family…

There has long been an anti-Bonaparte bias in English-speaking academia, nicely balanced with a pro-Bonaparte stance among the French.

Comparatively speaking, Napoleon WAS great. Certainly compared to most of his contemporaries. If he'd not overreached and become a magnet for reactionary opposition forces across Europe, he might well be known as "Napoleon the Great". He's certainly as entitled to the term as Alexander or Catherine or Frederick or any number of other rulers.

Why not ask the Germans, Spanish, Portuguese, Russians and his many other victims how great he was? I would disagree that Napoleon is universially reviled in English language discourse, you only have to look at TMP to find many Anglo-Napoleon-ophiles. Also, Alexander the "Great" was a genocidal maniac, something Napoleon never was, so I'm not sure being called "Great" is that much of a complement.

Well, I am talking about professional historians, not TMPers. My collection of Napoleonic history books exhibits a definite bias; but I am only familiar with books in English or French (some in translation), and do not have a familiarity with other takes. I'd be interested to hear what has been written in the past or what is thought today (because historical tastes change) by other Europeans.

I don't think that the sobriquet "Great" is taken as a moral judgement, historically speaking, but a mark of significant achievement or stature (even if only for propaganda purposes).

I've been to France, I've seen Napoleon's tomb and how the French remember him. I think there should be a book titled "Napoleon the Demigod"! :)

The Great? Those who were best qualified to comment, his ex's in Paris, seemed to suggest Nosey was better than Boney. I admit I often wonder how much that was the creation of Monarchist and Alliance propaganda. A bit like the rumour about the size (let alone the ultimate fate) of his appendage. Sic transit……….