If you like this video, check out some of the other lessons in our "History vs." series, which includes videos on Genghis Khan, Vladimir Lenin and more: History vs. Genghis Khan: ow.ly/XXbQB History vs. Vladimir Lenin: ow.ly/XXbTM History vs. Christopher Columbus: ow.ly/XXbXr History vs. Andrew Jackson: ow.ly/XXc1k History vs. Richard Nixon: ow.ly/XXc3T
+Euler Characteristic I pity the dude who will be Hitler's defendant. What can he defend that would say that Hitler's actions are debatable for either being good or bad. History vs Bonaparte is understandable since he was a ruler that promoted both liberalism and nationalism which is not entirely good or bad depending on your standpoint. Ignoring his atrocious policies, the good thing Hitler did was . . . paint.
I would look forward to History vs Thatcher since her term as Prime Minister of UK was a controversial one, enacting neo-capitalistic policies of privatization (Reaganism) and at the mean time pissing off the entire nation and even the parliament to the point of being replaced.
History vs Charles Martel! History vs Emperor Puyi! History vs Shimon Bar Kokhba! History vs Alexander the Great! History vs Pyotr the Great! History vs Muhammad (ok, that might be too controversial) History vs Sargon of Akkad! History vs John C. Calhoun! History vs William T. Sherman! (and a bonus one for us got nerds) History vs Tywin Lannister!
Inigo Bantok Meh, I have a feeling the House of Wettin would’ve come out of the woodwork to ensure they retained the Polish Crown. They did have a very good claim to it after all
Another reason why Napoleon is considered short is because he often appointed tall men for his bodyguards, to make them more intimidating. So thus, when in the midst of them, he looked shorter than he actually was.
There are so many modern myths about Bonaparte's height, which I call revisionism. Here I copy my comment to somebody's comment: as I always say, you should compare him with his peers. Bonaparte was definitely short for his time. You should not compare him with common people on urban areas at the time, who were disease-stricken and whose diet was low on meats and dairy products in an age of no refrigeration. Rather, people with means were just as tall as modern Europeans. In fact, people in the medieval Europe were just as tall as modern Europeans. We know because we have skeletons. (So, obviously in the countryside in the medieval Europe, people were eating plenty of meets and cheese and fish. Great.) Bonaparte, despite all his pretension of being "a man of the people", was from a comfortable background, and a minor noble himself. Actually, being a minor noble doesn't mean much materially, but his father was a relatively important person in the community, and a lawyer, and certainly not poor. So, yes, being 5 feet 6 was definitely short, especially when he stood with officers and marshals and generals, who were likely also mostly from at least relatively comfortable background like himself. A case in point: In WWI, officers were often a head taller than soldiers as if they were two different races.
It should also be noted that French feet were slightly longer than English feet, and English propaganda used this discrepancy to their advantage without ever clarifying that they were lying.
Fun Fact, Napoleon is a huge reason why we have canned food today. Because he was thinking about how to help his hungry soldiers during their long campaigns.
Whatever you think of Napoleon, the man lived a life worth more than a hundred men! A nobody from a backwater island who rose to become a genius-level general, an emperor who was sent into exile twice (because once couldn't stop him). His work ethic was obsessive, his ambition all-consuming, his goal absolutely clear. Through the will of one man, Europe was united on a scale not seen since the Roman Empire. He was the greatest actor on the stage of Europe at the beginning of the modern world. His historical legacy is rightfully contradictory and controversial. But the man lived.
Fart Inhaler when he went to school in France, he struggled so badly he always asked friends for change, went to the same cafe’s for free food, and bought only books, he was very thin and sent all his money back to Corsica for his family. He had about three changes of clothes, and the family business of selling fruit from a peppinier (dont know actual spelling) tree left him and his family destitute. He only really had money after he invaded Italy and took ‘contributions’ from the Vatican, Venice and other places in Italy
I always found Napoleon kinda badass. He invaded Europe. Then exiled to an island with no escape. Came back and overthrew the government with no shots fired.
Bruh the second French Revolution was a REVOLUTION it had plenty of gun shots but can't say he's badass without calling the ottoman leader that took the most fortified city at the time I think hint it's Istanbul or Constantinople
@@ein_blinde_Nashorn actually no because when the monarchs exiled Napoleon the first time they placed a monarchie at the head of France And when napoleon came back the monarchie that was set in place sent their armies (French) to fight Napoleon and his old garde but (and this is true) the armies they sent defected and joined napoleon's side and his army grew and grew until he restored power and was met by the French with extreme joy but then he fought at waterloo and lost for a final time
The British are, by far, the best in the world. The best in the world at rewriting history. I always wondered why Napoleon was so demonized by history. Portrayed as a threat to the Western World when it was really the Monarchies of Europe who felt the heat. I could have guessed it was the Brits.
The British lost most wars. Though Napoleon didn’t succeed in conquering Britain, he defended France from Britain along with his peers George Washington and the dude from Switzerland. The British had a fine influence, but couldn’t maintain it for long. (The British gained their influence from a time of peace, then when they impacted violence they almost instantly lost their powers. The British should’ve stuck to trying to maintain peace, because they sucked at war.
It’s crazy how much this one man influenced the world. Changed Europe forever with laws and indirectly caused South American independence through disrupting the Portuguese and Spanish monarchs. As well as selling Louisiana to the United States more than doubling their current size when Jefferson purchased it
Pretty fair, except for the quick summary of the Napoleonic wars failing to mention that England never recognized Napoleon, broke the peace of Amiens, and helped to organize a total of five coalitions against him, which was the whole point of enforcing a blockade.
invented history lol revolutionary wars war in fact, first and second coalition wars were european kingdom tried to invade France to end the revolution. France won them then Napoleon came, and there were 5 other coalition wars, France won the 3 first and lost the 2 last (Leipzi and waterloo)
You forgot where England while organizing those coalitions barely did any fighting in Europe against him. They were far to busy usurping the mostly undefended French and Dutch colonial empires.
I guess Flanders, Egypt, Spain and Portugal constitute nothing? I guess naval battles like Nile, Trafalgar and 1st June constitute barely any fighting? Baring in mind that epic fleet actions involving 50+ ships of the line would be the equivalent in resources, cost and expertise of some of the biggest battles on the continent.
Napoleon said "My legacy will be my civil law code"...His legacy is indeed his civil law code, from which many countries derived theirs. He also said famously "Look very carefully at this world map...Here lies a sleeping giant. Let him sleep...For when he awakes, the world will quake.", speaking of China.
Ofcourse Napoleon's legacy is similar to that of Gaius Octavius Thurinus Augustus. Instituting law code. Reforming where republican life had dissolved in to disorder. All mirror the image Napoleon sought to copy. I believe in the sympathetic portrayal of Augustus, but perhaps not that of Napoleon, however, I am uneducated on the man.
@lone beast that was the Japanese admiral Isoroku Yamamoto in Tora tora tora the movie, it was a metaphor derived from his diary where he said the USA is a power that will win a war of attrition after 6 months of combat
@@yavuzselimakar5622 Napoléon was born on the 08/15/1769 at Ajaccio. Corsica is french since 05/05/1768. You can do the math ! Before, this island was genoese (Gênes) not italian.
@@yavuzselimakar5622 ...he began his career at the age of 10, in 1779, at the school of Brienne (Burgundy/France). There was a school where the children of the poor nobility were educated to become officers.
I feel napoleon was a mixture of both good and bad, though we must try our hardest to look not with modern eyes. Many who do not like him forget the fact many nations were doing just as many terrible things and tried to bully him into submission whilst the other side tries to praise him and justify any bad act he did. All I am certain of is that he was a creation of the time and a excellent commander. What a life he lived.
@@mrhorse6587 He needed to be bad, everyone wants to bring him down so instead of waiting to get shot he fired the first shot, as for the internal issues France needed some iron fist to unite them since the revolution took a bad turn and people were split between monarch and republic and even wanted to just surrender the country (Explains why Robespierre and the Jacobin did the whole terror thing and got away with it for years)
We have to understand that it's in the British national interest that no hegemon emerges on the continent, and that's why they were so anti-Napoleon because a hegemon on the continent could lead to the end of British naval dominance and would be a direct threat to British national security. Back in the days when Britain actually followed its national interest
@ Because Austria was threatening France that they will come and restore the French Monarchy. Not just Austria. So, yeah. I guess the Coalitions did start most of the wars.
@@Moaaz-mg9mv napoelonic code, he rewrote the whole legal system it was much more progressive than the monarchy even with Napoleon being dictator. He broadened the gap between rich and poor, empowetinf millions with the code. The bourbons (French kings) would have never done such progressive changes
@Nogent When Napoleon invaded Spain he captured their king, that destabilized their colonies including Argentina, then the people reunited in a "Cabildo Abierto" to vote: do we remain a colony? or do we start a revolution? of course the revolution won, if it wasnt for Napoleon my country would still be a colony. Oh, and they are called Malvinas...
When Napoleon got back to France after his exile, the law enforcement was called to go after him. As soon as they were in his presence, they kneeled. The middle and upper class were uneasy about his reappearance, but the poor loved him. Even if he gave the power to himself, he fought for the people. No one can say he didn’t love France and for that reason he is Emperor of the French.
As an answer for the question of the judge "How the world would be without him" And the Guy Said "Far better" Yeah, because Russia (the only Power in europe besides the UK that was not affect in its politics by Napoleon) was absolutely awesome and not a feudal hellhole like the entire continent was before hum for centuries.
For better! I believe Napoleon layed the foundation of the modern europe. He enforced the then new and superior metric system all over the continent. He had a big interest in culture, science and education and wanted to share it with his subjects. Many of the things we have today we have napoleon to thank for. Yes, he was also a big fan of war. But so was litarally everyone until World War 1 happened. People thought of war as a necessity. I find Napoleon fascinating and sometimes inspiring. And I'm german.
Yeah I think I approve of Napoleon. While he was a monarch he was still a man of his people and tried to balance the acts of the revolution with what the moderate majority of the population could agree with. And the invading of other countries was all for the benefit of the people of europe. Also may i add that the man reopened the school's and made it obligatory for children to go to school a couple of years, and to a very cheap price so even the poorest could afford school. That deserves some respect I find the defendant not guilty
the Netherlands were a republic. The Republic was never aggressive towards France. When Napoleon invaded us (as an agressor) he put his brother in charge as KING of Holland. Napoleon was so liberating...
'While he was a monarch' Monarchs aren't bad. Some are, but being a monarch or not has no positive or negative connotations. In fact I like monarchy as it is a symbol of stability. That is also one thing I like about Napoleon. He brought stability to France after more than a decade of chaos. Despite that, in no way would I approve of his invasions of Italy, Germany, Spain, Russia etc, I don't like the idea of going around like that, all countries can go their own paths, and it brought a lot of suffering. Also, conquering so many nations is very unrealistic, he should have known better. After all, he was pushed back eventually. Especially the invasion of Russia, he should have known.
+Lennart van der Ree “L&Art” we were already pretty much under French rule back then, because of the Batavian revolution. Also, remember that the so called awful king loved Dutch culture, going back to original Dutch republic and bringing back things lost during the Batavian revolution. He might've been king but he loved the Dutch, so much, that Napoleon took away his title as King of the Netherlands...he wasn't an awful tyrant or anything
+Alixundr And Prussia. I hate it when pre Revolution countries in Europe are often portrayed as backward, autocratic and un progressive when many of them embraced the Enlightenment, and that was way before the French Revolution which completely contradicted the values of the Enlightenment. In fact after the Revolution, as part of a reaction, countries became more reactionary conservative and authoritarian.
@@thomascoppens8498 if I'm guessing right, you're talking about the ottoman soldiers that surrendered somewhere in Palestinia or Liban? The same soldiers that had been already captured a few week earlier and freed on their word to never take arms against his army again?... well... not like there were already Geneva war rules or the like. Considering the way of the time, they were lucky to have been spared some sort of retribution the 1st time... and Napoleon just didn't have the manpower to just guard the prisonners while he was trying to make his way through the Ottoman empire to get back to Europe...
Fun fact : When Napoleon escaped from Elba, all the French joined him to bring him to Paris, an army sent by the king to stop him was on his way. Many testimonies tell that he would have advanced towards the army and said: "Who wants to kill his emperor?", the order to shoot is given but no one of the 50 soldiers in line shoots and they all rush towards him to embrace him.
Also remember that most of France hated Napoleon by that time as he had brought ruin and economical collapse to France by the 6th coalition. The only people that supported Napoleon were Parisian elites.
Sang-fantôme In the land of pharaohs and kings, they said Egypt could never be humbled. In the realm of forest and snow, they said Russia could never be tamed
@@theawantikamishra The Louvre Museum. Google the painter, his name is Eugène Delacroix and he presented it right after the July Monarchy was established in 1831.
Napoleon literally had multiple armies surrender and join him by taking off his shirt and flexing his chest The real question is if he was an overpowered anime character
I believe that Napoleon was not the villain of the story, but rather a flawed hero. While he did do things that were questionable and bad, the overwhelming majority of his actions were good and helped the people of France.
Napoleon III was somewhat similar. While in some ways he certainly wasn't his uncle, that wasn't necessarily a bad thing in a few of them. Prior to 1861, he was arguably smarter on foreign policy (the original Napoleon unfortunately made too many enemies) and also invested a lot more effort into rebuilding the French Navy (by 1860 it was the strongest in the world other than Britain if I remember correctly, the best shape it had been in since possibly the 1780s). He actually was so skilled at diplomacy for a while that he got Queen Victoria and Prince Albert to come to Versailles as his guests of honor! Mindboggling to think about (a British monarch as the guest of a reigning Bonaparte). What did him in unfortunately is that he became overly aggressive on foreign policy and didn't build an alliance with Russia (or perhaps Austria) against the Prussians. As for his domestic rule, it was probably one of the most successful of any French leader in the last 300 years. Napoleon III had his flaws, but he's probably one of the most underrated monarchs of the whole 19th Century in my opinion.
Flawed hero is a poor way to say it Sympathetic villain or Anti-Hero is better Because the good things he did were almost always overshadowed by the harrowing human cost of the bad things
Why not mentioning the fact that Great Britain (and especially Cornwallis) and its allies did not respect the 1802 treaty of peace with France (known as "Peace of Amien") they had signed BEFORE Napoleon started his war against Great Britain and its Monarch allies in their territories? When litening to you he went to invade all of Europe because he was a crazy guy... but he actually had offered a treaty of peace to the monarchies (even giving some land belonging to France) who had tried to invade France after the revolution.... I am sorry but if his primary intentions had been an invasion of all his neighbors he wouldn't have given them some land... This sound very biased to me...(just as every telling of Great Britain's history) Not to mention the non respect of the Treaty of Utrecht (1713) with the enslavement and deportation of the Acadians (French colonists of Canada) during the Great Deportation ("Grand derangement" of 1749) that happened before Napoleon attacked the English...
No Commentary I am a big fan of napoleon, but if you actually read historical manuscripts and accounts from the time, you’ll see that the French and napoleon actually negotiated too well. They didn’t really commit to the treaty, stating they would ‘separate the crowns of France and Italy when he died’ and recognising the integrity of the Netherlands and Switzerland etc. where the British had to evacuate Ceylon(nowadays Sri Lanka), give up Malta, Pondicherry, a bunch of other small territories, in addition to the fact that napoleon violated peacetime by sending spies to Britain.
Fernando Da Silva I cant agree. Napoleon simply didn’t commit to the treaty. As a result of this, the British simply viewed the peace as an experiment, which, by the end of 1802, had clearly failed. Whilst napoleon reportedly cared about the peace, he was more than willing to go to war, the army of Britain, anti-British speeches and propaganda, as well as a centuries old anglophobia contributing to the failure of Amiens. I appreciate that english may not be your first language but you’ll have to express your ideas with more detail to convince me that Britain was more at fault.
@@LossztYT the same could be said about britain Who's sole ennemy for centuries was France. And since the seven years war, where you people violated every single war law, you believed yourself to be superior to the french, which tbh we cant blame you for. Sending spies during times of peace is like eating soup in autumn, not the right time, but not surprising either. Also i dont understand your statement since France respected the amiens treaty as you said. The crowns of italy and france were to be dissociated at his death, which is absolutely normal for the time, since the nation was conquered. Britain didnt say anything in 1748 when prussia conquered silesia and kept it. Also we left the netherlands as demanded, while you were just looking for an excuse to actually relaunch a whole war because you legitimely believed that napoleon would reunite europe as one. The UK has always based its foreign diplomacy on dividing via its wealth, european countries. France was more about uniting europe under military conquest. Under napoleon it is 2 philosophic diplomacies that faced each other. And stating that napoleons won would not be a lie, but cannot be considered a truth either.
Napoleon was attacked ALL THE TIME except for twice, when he invaded Spain and when he invaded Russia. All other campaigns were in self defense. Besides, he is seen in Poland like a liberator because he gave Poland some sort of Autonomy. Heck, he even had a Polish legion.
+Napoleonheir1805 Invading Spain was a big mistake, but they liberated American collonies, leading to the Spain we see right now. A post-dictatorship with a corrupt government.
Napoleonheir1805 Exacto, pero el gobierno que ejerció carlos iv fue increiblemente malo e hizo que el reino estuviera a cargo de fernando vii, un autentico subnormal, un retrasado, vamos.
To be honest, for years i've wondered why Napoleon was always called a tyrant. Anyone I asked around school would just shrug. Hitler was a tyrant, African warlords are tyrants, Pol Pot was a tyrant. But from all I could ever figure out all Napoleon ever did was invade a few places. Not to mention how so many French people loved him.
Honestly, same. If anything I find him quite talented, even at a young age for his military intelligence. He was cunning and ambitious, yes. But certainly not a tyrant.
swan gautier il a rétablit l'esclavage , il a détruit la démocratie instauré après la revolution Avec un coup d'etat et il a instauré une dictature Qui a envahit tlm
That’s amazing. I always tell people that the Napoleonic code influenced up to 40 countries, as stated by Andrew Robert but I never have looked up each individual one. I think wiki puts it as high as 70
Napoleon was born in the Mediterranean island of Corsica from an Italian father and a Corsicana mother. He came from a noble familly, they were able to pay for his education and he went to an elite french military school. So Napoleon was not french at all. Another obscur fact about him, he has muslim ancestry from the middle east from his italian side, this explains his curiosity about Egypt
He was tyrant sure, but he is the kind of tyrant you would love, because despite his fault, he is still the most charismatic ruler europe has ever seen. Followed very closely by people like Bismarck Charlemagne etc...
@@Freedmoon44 Not more tyrant than the other monarchs of Europe at the time, you could even consider he we less of a tyrant than them context is important
@@madhurawat155 thats not exactly complicated considering Charlemagne had NO religious tolerance "oh hey one of your most Sacred Tree of your religion? Would be a shame if say it were to burn because you burned a random a** wooden church like last week" or "oh you still refuse to surrender well good thing for you is that you are litteraly coackroaches, good thing for me is that you still had another super sacred tree or whatever and we will make a new Wodden church out of it"
Also I've read that Napoleon's personal guard (the old guard) were made up of very tall imposing men. This is possibly a reason that he appeared "short". en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Guard
the old guard wasn't especially tall, but you had to be in the army since 10 years to be in it. They were "just" veterans from multiple battles. On the other hand, their hat was really tall, while Napoleon favourite outfit was a grey coat with a bicorne, which probably appeared cheap compared to the uniform of the most prestigious french unit at the time.
Convainca.... Hahaha votre maîtrise du français aurait fait plaisir à l'empereur et il dénote clairement un passage dans ses fameux lycées. Il y autant de raison d'admirer Napoléon que d'admirer Pétain, si ce n'est que Napoléon a fait une meilleure propagande.
Well you Polish peoplw love anyone who hates Russia..... Except Germany perhaps, but there is no such hatred like Polish hatred for Russians. It`s not that you don`t have reason to, but still.
Sorry guys, this is out of the topic but I really need to talk about the animation The animated Napoleon looks all smug, cool and cute I really love it 😌😌😌
Actually, Napoleon was more of an opportunist than a real agressor. Remember, expect the invasion of Spain and the invasion of Russia, the other europeans powers started the coalition. Also, the Grand Army was already retreating when the winter came. The guy stayed in Moscow for a month.
Russia secretly joined another coalition with Britain, Sweden and Prussia against France. They had to attack in 1812. Napoleon moved his armies to the Poland and proposed negotiations and then russian tsar declared war against him. So technically it was Russia who break the 1807 peace treaty with him(russian tsar was bribed by the british ambassador to do so). Many modern russian historicians admit this.
He attacked Russia only because he knew that Tsar Alexander was secretly preparing a surprise attack with Prussia and Great Britain. He interecepted a message. So attacking Russia was the only option to force him to have a real peace/
@@Nik0lay11 Poland was the part of the Russian empire. Imagine if some country moved her troops into the Northern Irland and then proposed negotiations/
Im not French (im German/Scottish) but this guy was epic and the video from the movie Napoleon were he meets the other french and says the thing I am your emperor and then they join him brings tears of joys I couldn't imagine being there and seeing that I would fall to my feet of shock im crying while typing this its so epic :).
Jefferson was actually a really controversial figure. He has the famous saying that "All men shall be created equal," but at the same time he owned several slaves which of whome he treated badly (except for the one he cheated on his wife with).
"It is very true that I have said that I considered Napoleon's presence in the field equal to forty thousand men in the balance." -Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington
@Jeremy Brookes You can't judge a 19th century man on 21st century ideals. Slavery was needed to maintain global relevance, and the treatment of women was actually not active oppression, more so than a lack of rights. And the monarchies are to blame for the wars, and the majority of the lives lost on both sides.
@@luisaugustobonilha8210 he was a founding father at least be presectful without him the world would vbe very diffrent if the united states did not exist in bad and good ways
Hello M. Gendler, just a little word to tell you that "La liberté guidant le peuple" from Delacroix does not depict the 1789's revolution but another one in 1830.
This comment deserves to be top of the pile. "Liberty Leading the People" is so often misused that I just assume I'm about to hear about the 1789 revolution any time that I see it.
Napoleon wasnt the attacker , British dont respect all article of Treaty of Amiens, vote war credit during peace time and afterall arrest french and hollandia ship when the come in british port, so napoleon answer with the blocus and he war was do
I’m sorry but building up an army in north France and threatening invasion is why the peace failed. Napoleon also tried to bring Spain in on his side by paying them huge amounts of gold.
We have to understand that it's in the British national interest that no hegemon emerges on the continent, and that's why they were so anti-Napoleon because a hegemon on the continent could lead to the end of British naval dominance and would be a direct threat to British national security. Back in the days when Britain actually followed its national interest
Depends on how you you consider being the greatest general. As the famous quote states "you've won the battle but not the war". Winning lots of battles doesn't make you win the war for sure. Just take a look at Hannibal's conquest of Rome
@@zsepirpapkendo3223 except he faced the superpowers of europe and the entire continent. while maintaining total political power. no one had ever done that. you may not lost a single battle but what napoleon faced is out of everyones grasp.
@@zsepirpapkendo3223 but by the impact of their actions...well look at that: civil law code of most western nations, one of europe's greatest harbors, metric system...I think the adagio actions speak louder than words do fit the man.
Napoleon built the modern world. Anyone who battles monarchy is a friend of mankind. Oh, and then he went and crowned himself emperor. Therein lies the ambiguity.
It's been 6 years, but before turning himself into a monarch the republic was already dead. So it made sense to transition to a more powerful rule. Not to mention his true aim after becoming consul was to build a Dynasty
Even if some people here think he was this giant conquerer of Europe and that he was all bad I would still fight in his army just because he is one the greatest Generals the world has ever seen and I'm betting many people would agree. also he respected his soldiers a lot more then most other generals did at the time I mean his old guard had the right to complain to him openly about some of the most stupidest and smallest things.
I sure as hell wouldn't. Not necessarily because of any judgement of him but of the style of warfare that was practiced. Just line up load and fire hoping you hit someone despite not aiming and then charge in with bayonets.
When Napoleon invades some European nation (even though he was on defence in more than half of the wars) he is bad. But if European powers invades large parts of Asia and Africa, they are not?
@@vincegalila7211 You definetly didn't want to serve in his army because he was too ambitious for his own good. He'd constantly force you in pointless wars for ego and glory.
Why? As far as I am aware, Julius Caesar is generally regarded as being one of the greatest Roman emperors(I am aware he technically wasn't emperor, but dictator for life fits the description well enough In my opinion) and is considered by many to be the greatest human being in history.
redbaron5247 That is one opinion people have. But if you were not aware many also see him as power hungry genocidal fascist who destroyed the Roman republic and is responsible for the crazy emperors. He is quite divisive with much debate if his assassination was justified. The general opinion is usually between the extremes. Anyway I think he would be good for the series with many hating him and many loving him with a huge impact he had on history.
@@redbaron5247 Caesar was neither an emperor nor a king. Perhaps he could've become a king, but Brutus chimed in with others to keep the Senate the strongest organ in the Republic.
Iva F. he was a king in all but a name. He was power hungry, he gave himself nearly all the titles to exist in his time. A love Caesar, but he neither good or bad for sure)
He is pretty much the reason why Switzerland even came into existence, so I can't be angry of him... the people in Switzerland are probably the most politically sovereign people in the world, and also one of the wealthiest...
Merthalophor Beautiful landscape, great food, nice cities, interesting history, very intellectual and industrious. I think it is the best country to live in.
SGrint Different times, different ideologies, different means, but what they try to do, it's the same that a lot of people try to do, basically since ever: Join Europe. Even today that happens, The EU it's basically another form of doing that. They all eventually fail. I wonder why...
It is not a bad thing to unite Europe, it's a bad thing to do it with force, and under a dictator. I honestly would have no problem if a United States of Europe emerged peacefully. It would ensure that European countries won't go to war with each-other anymore, and I think that a peacefully united Europe would be very beneficial for e.g. the economy. Also a democratic state is much more stable. So far Europe has only been united by dictators, that's why it has failed every time.
SGrint Why to unite Europe under one political view? the more polotics try to do something, the more they fuck things up. Borders are stupid, and i sure think one coin is very handy. But the more politics try to do something, the worst. Let people live they life, and Europe will be in peace. even with all the differences, and nobody feel as european, I thing europeans really respect one another. Even those countryies with historical rivalries, people get along just fine. Stop try to make "one Europe", we are not "one Europe", we are a lot of countries that really respect one another. And that is just perfect.
+SGrint US/Canada would need to join first, then Greenland/Iceland, then merge with the European Union (which at some point is pretty much inevitably going to become a federation with a capital in what was formerly Germany).
I remember in French class a week ago, we played some sort of card game. I had a really great strategy. (We only were 3 persons xD because our school got a threat). And one of the three of us, called me Napoleon... Even though I'm a female.
I am french and I believe you are right but I would not blame the British more than us. France did it too and in some proportion India did it also to become the version of India that was before. Leading nations write History to their best advantage, this is why history cannot be seen as some exact science. Could you consider British or french domination over territories good or bad is a different story. The time needed to rewrite History with an ink made of regrets and you are already to the next page. I only wish humanity would have carried history to more peaceful ways but it is simply not in our DNA.
Can a better picture be chosen for the Revolution of 1789 at 0:10 ? That picture by Delacroix is representing the Revolution of 1830, with people clothed in 1830 attire.
The image he associates at the beginning vdeo to the French Revolution of 1789 is actually commemorating the [French] July Revolution of 1830. It's the famous "Liberty Leading the People" painting by Eugène Delacroix .... featured on Coldplay's "Viva la Vida" album (tangent). Get your visual symbols and references straight, man! Alex Gendler vs History
I like how the British were claiming that France had become too powerful and must be stopped, yet they held most of the world. lol France just wanted to survive bruh.
The balance of power is referring to mainland europe not the entire world even historians agree that germany during ww1 was the most powerful nation in mainland Europe despite it not being the largest country
@@oscarchoy9469 Germany was by far the largest country by population in Europe if we somewhat exclude Russia. It had 68 million people against 52 for Austria-Hungary, 43 for UK and 41 for France
There are few people in history as incredible as Napoleon Bonaparte. Arguably the greatest military mind to walk this earth. I urge people to look more into him.
He was definitely average height for the time, if not a little taller. The Imperial Garde just needed a height requirement of 6 foot, so in comparison he looked small.
Do one for George Armstrong Custer. Was he America's an incompetent, glory seeking and arrogant military officer who's belief in white supremacy was his downfall? Or was he an unfair victim of treason when his second in command willfully disobeyed his order to provide reinforcements at Last Stand hill? Or maybe he was both? Maybe you should also have one for Custer's second in command Fredrick Benteen. Was he a wise tactician who retreated from a lost battle? Or was he a coward who refused to aid Custer when he was ordered to reinforce him at Last Stand Hill?
Many ideologist think that the "Gaullism" (the principles and policies of Charles de Gaulle) is really similar to the "Bonapartism". A French ideology which claims to be patriotic, believes in the greatness of France,is hated by the Britains, is supposed to be neither on the right nor on the left, consider that the compagnies should protect the workers like good fathers, is catholic but respect all religions, think that a great Leader is the best choice for France, but this Great Leader must consult his people by referendums of plebiscites. the vast majority of Bonapartist parties or organizations have either become Gaullists or remained Bonapartist but still admire De Gaulle. So yes, the Bonapartism exist, but it has evolved into the Gaullism.
@@UnpseudopascommelesautresNo he wasn’t. Why can’t people just accept that we don’t need to be so opinionated about everything and everyone?! It’s very possible to be neutral. Of course, people will find ways to get upset with you regardless, but this further confirms my view that human beings are just worthless.
One fact I find interesting- the iconic image of him holding his hand to his stomach somewhat inside his shirt was because he was usually massaging it, because he dealt with frequent stomach pains. Modern theories suggest these pains were a side effect from a poison attempt
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 88 | คู่เอก "ป้อมเพชร vs อัสลามจอน"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1ZqTVVbMgbo/mqdefault.jpg)
If you like this video, check out some of the other lessons in our "History vs." series, which includes videos on Genghis Khan, Vladimir Lenin and more:
History vs. Genghis Khan: ow.ly/XXbQB
History vs. Vladimir Lenin: ow.ly/XXbTM
History vs. Christopher Columbus: ow.ly/XXbXr
History vs. Andrew Jackson: ow.ly/XXc1k
History vs. Richard Nixon: ow.ly/XXc3T
+TED-Ed Nice video. ETA for History vs Hitler?
+TED-Ed do you take suggestions for History vs?
+Euler Characteristic I pity the dude who will be Hitler's defendant. What can he defend that would say that Hitler's actions are debatable for either being good or bad.
History vs Bonaparte is understandable since he was a ruler that promoted both liberalism and nationalism which is not entirely good or bad depending on your standpoint.
Ignoring his atrocious policies, the good thing Hitler did was . . . paint.
I would look forward to History vs Thatcher since her term as Prime Minister of UK was a controversial one, enacting neo-capitalistic policies of privatization (Reaganism) and at the mean time pissing off the entire nation and even the parliament to the point of being replaced.
History vs Charles Martel!
History vs Emperor Puyi!
History vs Shimon Bar Kokhba!
History vs Alexander the Great!
History vs Pyotr the Great!
History vs Muhammad (ok, that might be too controversial)
History vs Sargon of Akkad!
History vs John C. Calhoun!
History vs William T. Sherman!
(and a bonus one for us got nerds) History vs Tywin Lannister!
The polish anthem literally has Napoleon in their anthem. “Bonaparte”. And it says how he helped them get their land back for a bit.
Actually, it's not how he helped, but how he gave the example. It's a difference.
Helped.... ish.... The Duchy of Warsaw had the King of Saxony as its Duke. Not overly independent
Inigo Bantok Meh, I have a feeling the House of Wettin would’ve come out of the woodwork to ensure they retained the Polish Crown. They did have a very good claim to it after all
Poland was made into a client state
Miriam no
"My enemies are many, my equals are none" - Napoleon Bonaparte
That's from total war
@@eziccorporation1248 You got me.
in the shade of olive trees they said Italy could never be conquered
In the land of phoros and kings they said Egypt could never be humbled
@@eziccorporation1248 In the realm of forest and snow, they said Russia... could never be tamed.
Another reason why Napoleon is considered short is because he often appointed tall men for his bodyguards, to make them more intimidating. So thus, when in the midst of them, he looked shorter than he actually was.
He would be considered short for todays standards, but people where shorter when he lived.
There are so many modern myths about Bonaparte's height, which I call revisionism. Here I copy my comment to somebody's comment:
as I always say, you should compare him with his peers. Bonaparte was definitely short for his time. You should not compare him with common people on urban areas at the time, who were disease-stricken and whose diet was low on meats and dairy products in an age of no refrigeration. Rather, people with means were just as tall as modern Europeans. In fact, people in the medieval Europe were just as tall as modern Europeans. We know because we have skeletons. (So, obviously in the countryside in the medieval Europe, people were eating plenty of meets and cheese and fish. Great.)
Bonaparte, despite all his pretension of being "a man of the people", was from a comfortable background, and a minor noble himself. Actually, being a minor noble doesn't mean much materially, but his father was a relatively important person in the community, and a lawyer, and certainly not poor. So, yes, being 5 feet 6 was definitely short, especially when he stood with officers and marshals and generals, who were likely also mostly from at least relatively comfortable background like himself.
A case in point: In WWI, officers were often a head taller than soldiers as if they were two different races.
It should also be noted that French feet were slightly longer than English feet, and English propaganda used this discrepancy to their advantage without ever clarifying that they were lying.
Vive le france!
Simply put, he was 1m65, which translates to 5"5, which, at the time, was average for a French male
Fun Fact, Napoleon is a huge reason why we have canned food today. Because he was thinking about how to help his hungry soldiers during their long campaigns.
Huh neat
He hold an invention contest for food preservation and so was invented the first canned food a big glass bottle sterilized with preserved food in it
Shame he wasn’t thinking of his soldiers in africa when he ran away or Russia where he forced marched them through winter
That's kind of an overstatement.
I think if Napoleon Never existed we'd still have canned food to this day.
*GASP* he gave us canned bread?!
Whatever you think of Napoleon, the man lived a life worth more than a hundred men! A nobody from a backwater island who rose to become a genius-level general, an emperor who was sent into exile twice (because once couldn't stop him). His work ethic was obsessive, his ambition all-consuming, his goal absolutely clear. Through the will of one man, Europe was united on a scale not seen since the Roman Empire. He was the greatest actor on the stage of Europe at the beginning of the modern world. His historical legacy is rightfully contradictory and controversial. But the man lived.
Bravo!
Abhinav Tiku
he wasnt a nobody, he came from a wealthy family, which gave him oppertunities other could not afford or achieve.
@@coolman124356they weren't wealthy, he came from impoverished Corsican nobility.
Fart Inhaler when he went to school in France, he struggled so badly he always asked friends for change, went to the same cafe’s for free food, and bought only books, he was very thin and sent all his money back to Corsica for his family. He had about three changes of clothes, and the family business of selling fruit from a peppinier (dont know actual spelling) tree left him and his family destitute. He only really had money after he invaded Italy and took ‘contributions’ from the Vatican, Venice and other places in Italy
I always found Napoleon kinda badass. He invaded Europe. Then exiled to an island with no escape. Came back and overthrew the government with no shots fired.
he is badass
European countries actually declare war on Napoleon more than he to them
Captain Jack Sparrow
Bruh the second French Revolution was a REVOLUTION it had plenty of gun shots but can't say he's badass without calling the ottoman leader that took the most fortified city at the time I think hint it's Istanbul or Constantinople
@@ein_blinde_Nashorn actually no because when the monarchs exiled Napoleon the first time they placed a monarchie at the head of France And when napoleon came back the monarchie that was set in place sent their armies (French) to fight Napoleon and his old garde but (and this is true) the armies they sent defected and joined napoleon's side and his army grew and grew until he restored power and was met by the French with extreme joy but then he fought at waterloo and lost for a final time
The British are, by far, the best in the world.
The best in the world at rewriting history.
I always wondered why Napoleon was so demonized by history. Portrayed as a threat to the Western World when it was really the Monarchies of Europe who felt the heat.
I could have guessed it was the Brits.
no it was monarchy's all over the world so don't just point the finger at the victor next time
i know but in this day and age it is not, we look for historical facts which show napoleon wasn't still a very great guy
@@comfortablynumbechoes3258 they were well publicized events which for a great person to do wrong is just normal but can never be unforgettable
The British lost most wars. Though Napoleon didn’t succeed in conquering Britain, he defended France from Britain along with his peers George Washington and the dude from Switzerland. The British had a fine influence, but couldn’t maintain it for long. (The British gained their influence from a time of peace, then when they impacted violence they almost instantly lost their powers. The British should’ve stuck to trying to maintain peace, because they sucked at war.
Farahnaz Aziz and historians are there to separate the myth from fact
Here in Brazil we're a thankful for Napoleon invasions across Europe if it wasn't for that Brazil would take far more years to have its independence
It’s crazy how much this one man influenced the world. Changed Europe forever with laws and indirectly caused South American independence through disrupting the Portuguese and Spanish monarchs. As well as selling Louisiana to the United States more than doubling their current size when Jefferson purchased it
Napoléon 3
@@bleachigo783
Napoleon 3 arrived long after Latin American independence
I have not been taught to view this man one way or another.
But I am doing my own research.
Napoleon was one of the worst human beings to have ever disgraced this earth.
in France, we really like Napoleon ;D
I am from the USA and I like Napoleon, however I am not sure what other Americans think of him.
@@imperialguardsman521
Pure british propaganda but you americans are our friends forever ^^
In Poland Napoleon is treated as a hero, he is even praised in Polish national anthem
Évidemment qu'on l'aime notre Napo ! Y'a que les anglaises qui l'aiment pas
vive l empereur , vive la france !!!
Pretty fair, except for the quick summary of the Napoleonic wars failing to mention that England never recognized Napoleon, broke the peace of Amiens, and helped to organize a total of five coalitions against him, which was the whole point of enforcing a blockade.
Shane H other Nations in Europe also broke their peace treaty with Napoleon.
Odrama Vinladen ??? What ???
invented history lol
revolutionary wars war in fact, first and second coalition wars were european kingdom tried to invade France to end the revolution. France won them
then Napoleon came, and there were 5 other coalition wars, France won the 3 first and lost the 2 last (Leipzi and waterloo)
You forgot where England while organizing those coalitions barely did any fighting in Europe against him. They were far to busy usurping the mostly undefended French and Dutch colonial empires.
I guess Flanders, Egypt, Spain and Portugal constitute nothing? I guess naval battles like Nile, Trafalgar and 1st June constitute barely any fighting? Baring in mind that epic fleet actions involving 50+ ships of the line would be the equivalent in resources, cost and expertise of some of the biggest battles on the continent.
"I saw the crown of France laying on the ground, so I picked it up with my sword" -Napoleon Bonaparte
He didn’t say thay
@@-hydro huh?
@@IsaiahINRI He didn’t say that
@@-hydro im assuming you have proof of this?
@@IsaiahINRI You show me proof that he said it
I'm not French and I've studied Napoleon for years due to my interest to him. I think he's a great guy!
Same
same
reinstated slavery what a great guy
didnt he murder loads of egyptians for no reason?
What about the seige of Jaffa?? That was cruel of him to break his promises and kill the people in Jaffa when he promised them to keep them alive
Napoleon said "My legacy will be my civil law code"...His legacy is indeed his civil law code, from which many countries derived theirs.
He also said famously "Look very carefully at this world map...Here lies a sleeping giant. Let him sleep...For when he awakes, the world will quake.", speaking of China.
Ofcourse Napoleon's legacy is similar to that of Gaius Octavius Thurinus Augustus. Instituting law code. Reforming where republican life had dissolved in to disorder. All mirror the image Napoleon sought to copy.
I believe in the sympathetic portrayal of Augustus, but perhaps not that of Napoleon, however, I am uneducated on the man.
dude where are you from?
UUU U nope it actually was referring to China,as to which China now that would be a topic for another time.
Not only china it should be whole of asia
@lone beast that was the Japanese admiral Isoroku Yamamoto in Tora tora tora the movie, it was a metaphor derived from his diary where he said the USA is a power that will win a war of attrition after 6 months of combat
Napoléon Bonaparte: not the Emperor of France, Emperor of the French.
Actually,Napoleon was a italian. So He was never a french but he became emperor of french Peoples
@@yavuzselimakar5622 Napoléon was born on the 08/15/1769 at Ajaccio. Corsica is french since 05/05/1768. You can do the math ! Before, this island was genoese (Gênes) not italian.
@@yavuzselimakar5622 ...he began his career at the age of 10, in 1779, at the school of Brienne (Burgundy/France). There was a school where the children of the poor nobility were educated to become officers.
@@choux-hiboux7469 still, he was the son of two Italians.
@@cezirarudha5483 ok but he was ethnicaly Italian
Napoleon was taller than the Duke of Wellington
irony
Hahaha Iron!!! Because he was the iron duke!! XD
Bryan Rojo nice
gottem
Yea that right
I'm a German and I really admire Napoleon. To me he really embodies the enlightened absolutism idea.
Jewish what about the Jewish An Deo???
Of course you do, you're German. Napoleon was one of the worst human beings to have ever disgraced this earth.
@@mrhorse6587 Now give some examples to illustrate your claim.
@@Zakrovik He won't he's simply too busy copy pasting his comments again and again.
@@mrhorse6587 Hey man, go f**ck yourself.
I feel napoleon was a mixture of both good and bad, though we must try our hardest to look not with modern eyes. Many who do not like him forget the fact many nations were doing just as many terrible things and tried to bully him into submission whilst the other side tries to praise him and justify any bad act he did. All I am certain of is that he was a creation of the time and a excellent commander. What a life he lived.
No there was absolutely no good in him at all. Napoleon was one of the worst human beings to have ever disgraced this earth.
@@mrhorse6587 I guess but remember the empires of europe attacked him first
He is like life
@@mrhorse6587 he’s one of the biggest givers of rights in all history. Napoleonic Code. Far from innocent himself tho
@@mrhorse6587 He needed to be bad, everyone wants to bring him down so instead of waiting to get shot he fired the first shot, as for the internal issues France needed some iron fist to unite them since the revolution took a bad turn and people were split between monarch and republic and even wanted to just surrender the country (Explains why Robespierre and the Jacobin did the whole terror thing and got away with it for years)
Meh, I do what I can...
Non, puisque tu es mort.
+MrPositronus He's clearly not
+MrPositronus BLASPHEMY!
Sacré bléu!
MrPositronus, on meurt tous un jours c:
Didn't the coalitions start most of the wars?
mpitt0730 EXACTLY!
- Joseph He said “most” which is true because the allied coalitions did start most of the wars, especially under Napoleon’s reign.
We have to understand that it's in the British national interest that no hegemon emerges on the continent, and that's why they were so anti-Napoleon because a hegemon on the continent could lead to the end of British naval dominance and would be a direct threat to British national security. Back in the days when Britain actually followed its national interest
@ Because Austria was threatening France that they will come and restore the French Monarchy. Not just Austria. So, yeah. I guess the Coalitions did start most of the wars.
@@obihugzenobi I think it was because at that point they were a little isolationist and they may not have like france during the franco prussian war.
Actually in Argentina we respect Napoleon. So.... Long Live the emperor! 🇫🇷🇫🇷🇫🇷🇫🇷
Thanks from France
Thank you Argentina! 🇫🇷🇦🇷
@@Moaaz-mg9mv napoelonic code, he rewrote the whole legal system it was much more progressive than the monarchy even with Napoleon being dictator. He broadened the gap between rich and poor, empowetinf millions with the code. The bourbons (French kings) would have never done such progressive changes
@Nogent When Napoleon invaded Spain he captured their king, that destabilized their colonies including Argentina, then the people reunited in a "Cabildo Abierto" to vote: do we remain a colony? or do we start a revolution? of course the revolution won, if it wasnt for Napoleon my country would still be a colony.
Oh, and they are called Malvinas...
@Nogent Haha, I like it
When Napoleon got back to France after his exile, the law enforcement was called to go after him. As soon as they were in his presence, they kneeled. The middle and upper class were uneasy about his reappearance, but the poor loved him. Even if he gave the power to himself, he fought for the people. No one can say he didn’t love France and for that reason he is Emperor of the French.
He did hate france as a child, but who cares about that compared to his great empire he constructed for France?
He was complex. He shattered what a nearly a millennia of tradition in europe and totally rewrote the course of history.
As an answer for the question of the judge "How the world would be without him"
And the Guy Said "Far better"
Yeah, because Russia (the only Power in europe besides the UK that was not affect in its politics by Napoleon) was absolutely awesome and not a feudal hellhole like the entire continent was before hum for centuries.
@@dinamosflams yep. Russia hated Napoleon emancipating serfs and Jews in Warsaw
For better! I believe Napoleon layed the foundation of the modern europe. He enforced the then new and superior metric system all over the continent. He had a big interest in culture, science and education and wanted to share it with his subjects. Many of the things we have today we have napoleon to thank for. Yes, he was also a big fan of war. But so was litarally everyone until World War 1 happened. People thought of war as a necessity. I find Napoleon fascinating and sometimes inspiring. And I'm german.
Clemens Zabel Agree! He did many good things.
can i use this in my essay lol?
0:09 Never knew Abraham Lincoln was part of the French Revolution
😂😂😂😂😂😂
For real Napoleon really liked US and when G. Washington died he dedicated a day for remembering him
@@felixblanchard7349 the us was his main option for going back into exile when he was defeated by the 7th coalition
Is that supposed to be an easter egg?
Dam true
Yeah I think I approve of Napoleon.
While he was a monarch he was still a man of his people and tried to balance the acts of the revolution with what the moderate majority of the population could agree with. And the invading of other countries was all for the benefit of the people of europe. Also may i add that the man reopened the school's and made it obligatory for children to go to school a couple of years, and to a very cheap price so even the poorest could afford school. That deserves some respect
I find the defendant not guilty
the Netherlands were a republic. The Republic was never aggressive towards France. When Napoleon invaded us (as an agressor) he put his brother in charge as KING of Holland. Napoleon was so liberating...
+IShallUseFire! Obligatory school systems? Not like other states did it before him *cough* the bad bad tyrant called Austria.
'While he was a monarch'
Monarchs aren't bad. Some are, but being a monarch or not has no positive or negative connotations. In fact I like monarchy as it is a symbol of stability. That is also one thing I like about Napoleon. He brought stability to France after more than a decade of chaos.
Despite that, in no way would I approve of his invasions of Italy, Germany, Spain, Russia etc, I don't like the idea of going around like that, all countries can go their own paths, and it brought a lot of suffering.
Also, conquering so many nations is very unrealistic, he should have known better. After all, he was pushed back eventually. Especially the invasion of Russia, he should have known.
+Lennart van der Ree “L&Art” we were already pretty much under French rule back then, because of the Batavian revolution. Also, remember that the so called awful king loved Dutch culture, going back to original Dutch republic and bringing back things lost during the Batavian revolution. He might've been king but he loved the Dutch, so much, that Napoleon took away his title as King of the Netherlands...he wasn't an awful tyrant or anything
+Alixundr
And Prussia. I hate it when pre Revolution countries in Europe are often portrayed as backward, autocratic and un progressive when many of them embraced the Enlightenment, and that was way before the French Revolution which completely contradicted the values of the Enlightenment. In fact after the Revolution, as part of a reaction, countries became more reactionary conservative and authoritarian.
He was the most charismatic leader.
Ask the generals he brought on his egyptian campaign, oh the charisma he used in ordering a garrison that has just surrendered to him to be butchered.
@@thomascoppens8498 if I'm guessing right, you're talking about the ottoman soldiers that surrendered somewhere in Palestinia or Liban? The same soldiers that had been already captured a few week earlier and freed on their word to never take arms against his army again?... well... not like there were already Geneva war rules or the like. Considering the way of the time, they were lucky to have been spared some sort of retribution the 1st time... and Napoleon just didn't have the manpower to just guard the prisonners while he was trying to make his way through the Ottoman empire to get back to Europe...
*Adolf Shicklgruber would like to know your location*
Yeah he fully tricked his army in egypt that he will not leave him because all he had is a boat
@@thomascoppens8498 Everyone who invaded Egypt butchered a bunch of people, TIA.
Fun fact : When Napoleon escaped from Elba, all the French joined him to bring him to Paris, an army sent by the king to stop him was on his way.
Many testimonies tell that he would have advanced towards the army and said: "Who wants to kill his emperor?", the order to shoot is given but no one of the 50 soldiers in line shoots and they all rush towards him to embrace him.
Yes
Many soldiers broke their oaths just to not shoot their leader
Also remember that most of France hated Napoleon by that time as he had brought ruin and economical collapse to France by the 6th coalition. The only people that supported Napoleon were Parisian elites.
They fear me. Like a force of nature, a dealer of thunder and death. I say, I am Napoleon. I am EMPEROR!
hahaha! Napoleon total war!
Sang-fantôme In the land of pharaohs and kings, they said Egypt could never be humbled.
In the realm of forest and snow, they said Russia could never be tamed
They loved you. They embraced you. They said "Long Live Napoleon!" They Are Holy Zultist Peoples.
Such a cool game!
My Enemies are many..My Equals are none.
That "Viva la vida" painting that everyone uses to talk about the French Revolution actually references the SECOND French Revolution in 1830
Source?
@@theawantikamishra The Louvre Museum. Google the painter, his name is Eugène Delacroix and he presented it right after the July Monarchy was established in 1831.
I am French and I confirm
Napoleon was one of the worst human beings to have ever disgraced this earth.
@@mrhorse6587 you must love the Rockefeller’s..
Napoleon literally had multiple armies surrender and join him by taking off his shirt and flexing his chest
The real question is if he was an overpowered anime character
kirito level but better
Napoleon was one of the worst human beings to have ever disgraced this earth.
@@ploppledoodledoo17 Kirito + Naruto + Goku level
@@mrhorse6587 no
@@mrhorse6587 not in the slightest
I believe that Napoleon was not the villain of the story, but rather a flawed hero. While he did do things that were questionable and bad, the overwhelming majority of his actions were good and helped the people of France.
Napoleon III was somewhat similar. While in some ways he certainly wasn't his uncle, that wasn't necessarily a bad thing in a few of them. Prior to 1861, he was arguably smarter on foreign policy (the original Napoleon unfortunately made too many enemies) and also invested a lot more effort into rebuilding the French Navy (by 1860 it was the strongest in the world other than Britain if I remember correctly, the best shape it had been in since possibly the 1780s). He actually was so skilled at diplomacy for a while that he got Queen Victoria and Prince Albert to come to Versailles as his guests of honor! Mindboggling to think about (a British monarch as the guest of a reigning Bonaparte). What did him in unfortunately is that he became overly aggressive on foreign policy and didn't build an alliance with Russia (or perhaps Austria) against the Prussians. As for his domestic rule, it was probably one of the most successful of any French leader in the last 300 years. Napoleon III had his flaws, but he's probably one of the most underrated monarchs of the whole 19th Century in my opinion.
Flawed hero is a poor way to say it
Sympathetic villain or Anti-Hero is better
Because the good things he did were almost always overshadowed by the harrowing human cost of the bad things
Why not mentioning the fact that Great Britain (and especially Cornwallis) and its allies did not respect the 1802 treaty of peace with France (known as "Peace of Amien") they had signed BEFORE Napoleon started his war against Great Britain and its Monarch allies in their territories? When litening to you he went to invade all of Europe because he was a crazy guy... but he actually had offered a treaty of peace to the monarchies (even giving some land belonging to France) who had tried to invade France after the revolution.... I am sorry but if his primary intentions had been an invasion of all his neighbors he wouldn't have given them some land... This sound very biased to me...(just as every telling of Great Britain's history)
Not to mention the non respect of the Treaty of Utrecht (1713) with the enslavement and deportation of the Acadians (French colonists of Canada) during the Great Deportation ("Grand derangement" of 1749) that happened before Napoleon attacked the English...
No Commentary I am a big fan of napoleon, but if you actually read historical manuscripts and accounts from the time, you’ll see that the French and napoleon actually negotiated too well. They didn’t really commit to the treaty, stating they would ‘separate the crowns of France and Italy when he died’ and recognising the integrity of the Netherlands and Switzerland etc. where the British had to evacuate Ceylon(nowadays Sri Lanka), give up Malta, Pondicherry, a bunch of other small territories, in addition to the fact that napoleon violated peacetime by sending spies to Britain.
Purple Dorito Britain and France didn’t respect the treaty. But Britain was more bad that France in this part.
Fernando Da Silva I cant agree. Napoleon simply didn’t commit to the treaty. As a result of this, the British simply viewed the peace as an experiment, which, by the end of 1802, had clearly failed. Whilst napoleon reportedly cared about the peace, he was more than willing to go to war, the army of Britain, anti-British speeches and propaganda, as well as a centuries old anglophobia contributing to the failure of Amiens. I appreciate that english may not be your first language but you’ll have to express your ideas with more detail to convince me that Britain was more at fault.
Purple Dorito yes.... I’m not a very knowledge of Napoleon’s History
@@LossztYT the same could be said about britain Who's sole ennemy for centuries was France. And since the seven years war, where you people violated every single war law, you believed yourself to be superior to the french, which tbh we cant blame you for. Sending spies during times of peace is like eating soup in autumn, not the right time, but not surprising either. Also i dont understand your statement since France respected the amiens treaty as you said. The crowns of italy and france were to be dissociated at his death, which is absolutely normal for the time, since the nation was conquered. Britain didnt say anything in 1748 when prussia conquered silesia and kept it. Also we left the netherlands as demanded, while you were just looking for an excuse to actually relaunch a whole war because you legitimely believed that napoleon would reunite europe as one. The UK has always based its foreign diplomacy on dividing via its wealth, european countries. France was more about uniting europe under military conquest. Under napoleon it is 2 philosophic diplomacies that faced each other. And stating that napoleons won would not be a lie, but cannot be considered a truth either.
Napoleon was attacked ALL THE TIME except for twice, when he invaded Spain and when he invaded Russia. All other campaigns were in self defense. Besides, he is seen in Poland like a liberator because he gave Poland some sort of Autonomy. Heck, he even had a Polish legion.
+Napoleonheir1805 Invading Spain was a big mistake, but they liberated American collonies, leading to the Spain we see right now. A post-dictatorship with a corrupt government.
Si ya se, si no fuera por Napoleon la Independencia de las colonias hubiese sido mas dificil.
Napoleonheir1805 Exacto, pero el gobierno que ejerció carlos iv fue increiblemente malo e hizo que el reino estuviera a cargo de fernando vii, un autentico subnormal, un retrasado, vamos.
+Paco Cotero Bueno, cómo un latino desde mi punto de vista esta perfecto, lo siento por uds chicos
chicho Suarez Yo no tengo ningún problema: soy uruguayo de ascendencia italiana. Me beneficia lo que le pasó a los españoles xd
To be honest, for years i've wondered why Napoleon was always called a tyrant. Anyone I asked around school would just shrug. Hitler was a tyrant, African warlords are tyrants, Pol Pot was a tyrant. But from all I could ever figure out all Napoleon ever did was invade a few places. Not to mention how so many French people loved him.
French, Poles, Belgians, even some russians and italians ! On the other hand germans, spanish and british still hate him.
Poles saw a hope for freedom in him. Really
@@kreeperface397 the dutch loved his brother but Napoleon disposed of him.
Honestly, same. If anything I find him quite talented, even at a young age for his military intelligence. He was cunning and ambitious, yes. But certainly not a tyrant.
@@nine-vi7rw i can say you that his brother louis napoleon was one of the best monarchs of his time. He was ruler of the dutch at that time.
He didn’t save the revolution, he WAS the revolution.
-Napoleon
Hello Oversimplified fan
“Napoleon’s head could
be seen for miles”
@@user-tk9fm2sw5g He was undoubtedly and Unimaginably The master of Europe
@@Niaragochar hello oversimplified fan, and a cuber.
Amen to that
It's the Julius Caesar principal: One competent leader is better than 1,000 incompetant ones.
You really just blew my mind in terms of how people come to power when be your bearcuracies just don't work
Surviving 1000 incompetent leaders is better than 1 competent leader, you would have a very stable nation if you can survive that many leaders
Yup
Vive l'Empereur !!! Vive la France !!!
Vive la France!
Roméo MapperCB napoleon ne représente pas la France ce tyran
We don't have an emperor anymore, your comment arrived 150 years late ^^
Argument ?en quoi il était un tyran ?Napoléon représente au mieux la France aux coter de Louis XIV et Charles de Gaulle .
swan gautier il a rétablit l'esclavage , il a détruit la démocratie instauré après la revolution Avec un coup d'etat et il a instauré une dictature Qui a envahit tlm
"Impossible is a word to be found only in the dictionary of fools."
-Napoleon Bonaparte
Nah it's not this.
"Cela n'est pas possible, ce n'est pas français"
"Impossible is not french"
@@Raisonnance. "Impossible n'est pas français" but you got it right in english though
Well, there ARE things that are impossible!
I'm Rwandan our civil code is based on the Napoleonic Code, a Great Man indeed, you can't do better than a self made Emperor, you literally can't.
That’s amazing. I always tell people that the Napoleonic code influenced up to 40 countries, as stated by Andrew Robert but I never have looked up each individual one. I think wiki puts it as high as 70
you know saying youre rwandan demolishes your entire argument to the rest of the world right
Napoleon was one of the worst human beings to have ever disgraced this earth.
@@nearpod5207 you must not now much about Rwanda then.
@@mrhorse6587 you sound like you are British.
I'm a Napoleon fanboy
+Joakim That make two of us
three of us
Napoleon was born in the Mediterranean island of Corsica from an Italian father and a Corsicana mother. He came from a noble familly, they were able to pay for his education and he went to an elite french military school.
So Napoleon was not french at all.
Another obscur fact about him, he has muslim ancestry from the middle east from his italian side, this explains his curiosity about Egypt
+Joakim D four of us.
+Alberto Humova
No, Corsica has become French two years before Napoleon's birth. (Sorry my english, I'm French).
“So was this historical figure a good guy or a bad guy?” “Yes.”
He was tyrant sure, but he is the kind of tyrant you would love, because despite his fault, he is still the most charismatic ruler europe has ever seen.
Followed very closely by people like Bismarck Charlemagne etc...
@@Freedmoon44 Not more tyrant than the other monarchs of Europe at the time, you could even consider he we less of a tyrant than them context is important
@@ForeskinWillis Indeed
@@Freedmoon44 In terms of religious tolerance, he was far better than Charlemagne.
@@madhurawat155 thats not exactly complicated considering Charlemagne had NO religious tolerance "oh hey one of your most Sacred Tree of your religion? Would be a shame if say it were to burn because you burned a random a** wooden church like last week" or "oh you still refuse to surrender well good thing for you is that you are litteraly coackroaches, good thing for me is that you still had another super sacred tree or whatever and we will make a new Wodden church out of it"
The most important thing is that he was average height for its time.
Oversimplified reference?
“Victory is not always winning the battle…but rising every time you fall.” - Napoleon Bonaparte
Also I've read that Napoleon's personal guard (the old guard) were made up of very tall imposing men. This is possibly a reason that he appeared "short".
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Guard
the old guard wasn't especially tall, but you had to be in the army since 10 years to be in it. They were "just" veterans from multiple battles. On the other hand, their hat was really tall, while Napoleon favourite outfit was a grey coat with a bicorne, which probably appeared cheap compared to the uniform of the most prestigious french unit at the time.
Cuz they're elite grenadiers , thats why they were tall men , all grenadiers were like that
VIVE L'EMPEREUR!!!
Il était un homme merveilleux.
+Alberto Humova En quoi ?
bah face de porc
cet homme était un visionnaire
Convainca.... Hahaha votre maîtrise du français aurait fait plaisir à l'empereur et il dénote clairement un passage dans ses fameux lycées. Il y autant de raison d'admirer Napoléon que d'admirer Pétain, si ce n'est que Napoléon a fait une meilleure propagande.
In Poland we love him no metter what cause he gave us some kind of free country
+Zenon Malinowski the polish legion was the best
+anyseattleteamfangamer no Louis XVI did that and that help cause his downfall
But Napoleon sold Lousiana to the US :P
Well you Polish peoplw love anyone who hates Russia..... Except Germany perhaps, but there is no such hatred like Polish hatred for Russians.
It`s not that you don`t have reason to, but still.
napoleon the 3rd sold louisianna
Sorry guys, this is out of the topic but I really need to talk about the animation
The animated Napoleon looks all smug, cool and cute
I really love it 😌😌😌
Actually, Napoleon was more of an opportunist than a real agressor. Remember, expect the invasion of Spain and the invasion of Russia, the other europeans powers started the coalition. Also, the Grand Army was already retreating when the winter came. The guy stayed in Moscow for a month.
Russia secretly joined another coalition with Britain, Sweden and Prussia against France. They had to attack in 1812. Napoleon moved his armies to the Poland and proposed negotiations and then russian tsar declared war against him. So technically it was Russia who break the 1807 peace treaty with him(russian tsar was bribed by the british ambassador to do so). Many modern russian historicians admit this.
He attacked Russia only because he knew that Tsar Alexander was secretly preparing a surprise attack with Prussia and Great Britain. He interecepted a message. So attacking Russia was the only option to force him to have a real peace/
@@Nik0lay11 Poland was the part of the Russian empire. Imagine if some country moved her troops into the Northern Irland and then proposed negotiations/
Im not French (im German/Scottish) but this guy was epic and the video from the movie Napoleon were he meets the other french and says the thing I am your emperor and then they join him brings tears of joys I couldn't imagine being there and seeing that I would fall to my feet of shock im crying while typing this its so epic :).
History vs. Alexander the Great. Or History vs. Qin Shi Huang. Or History vs. Julius Caesar. Or History vs. Thomas Jefferson.
Joshua Evans-Lowell Why Jefferson?
MinigunGaming because reasons
Jefferson was actually a really controversial figure. He has the famous saying that "All men shall be created equal," but at the same time he owned several slaves which of whome he treated badly (except for the one he cheated on his wife with).
@Idk what my name should be, okay history vs alexander hamilton?
i'm already picturing the onslaught of musical fans.
Joshua Evans-Lowell u forgot history vs trump
"It is very true that I have said that I considered Napoleon's presence in the field equal to forty thousand men in the balance."
-Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington
It is interesting that France had nearly 20 different Constitutions in these 200 years, but it still uses Napoleon's Civil Code
It had a few variations though
Napoleon is a hero
VIVE L'EMPEREUR !!
@Jeremy Brookes You can't judge a 19th century man on 21st century ideals. Slavery was needed to maintain global relevance, and the treatment of women was actually not active oppression, more so than a lack of rights. And the monarchies are to blame for the wars, and the majority of the lives lost on both sides.
He kill allot of human in Egypt.... WTF!!
Tell that to us Germans, we naturally have a biased opinion on him, hail Bismarck
@@monlight6261 I don't know but I'm on Kuwait I'm gonna go MASJID
Napoléon is probably the worlds greatest antihero, as well as one of the most ambitious people in history. I take great inspiration from him.
That would be Joseph Stalin
He fought against the monarchs of europe so they are the heroes ? Even if they attacked him almost all the time ? xD
0:49
HEY!
I WAS AVERAGE HEIGHT AT THE TIME!!
History vs Bismark
+Reichspepe Reichtangle got rectangle because his ambitions lol. The best army at that time were the Prussians.
+Reichspepe tell to Danes ;)
Sebas3n ok
+Reichspepe Hello we are your french neighbourg and we LOVE Birsmarks....
***** Ok but me I like the germans :p
We don't like Birsmark but we understand why you like him, we have the same situation with Napoleon :D
I'm addicted to the History Vs. Series
Extra fact about him: After Washington died, he ordered 10 days of mourning throughout France.
This should make an awesome Assassin’s Creed game.
AC unity duh?
Paul McCharmley I know. But was there a sequence about that?
Washington a General who never win a battle - Gore Vidal
@@luisaugustobonilha8210 he was a founding father at least be presectful without him the world would vbe very diffrent if the united states did not exist in bad and good ways
@@luisaugustobonilha8210 he won 8 battles
Teacher: *leaves class*
The kids: 1:39
I have respect for Napoleon
I like Napoleon Dynamite more. His political beliefs could have changed mankind for the better.
+Crono Vote for Pedro.
+wingracer 16 Applauds
Genji 藤原 because your a Asian
Batavian Republic what does that have to do with anything? Lol
Hello M. Gendler, just a little word to tell you that "La liberté guidant le peuple" from Delacroix does not depict the 1789's revolution but another one in 1830.
And bravo for the ideas, it is really good, I love the fact that it is a trial
This comment deserves to be top of the pile. "Liberty Leading the People" is so often misused that I just assume I'm about to hear about the 1789 revolution any time that I see it.
It is this event that is commemorated in the Le Bastille memorial (NOT the storming of the Bastille in 1789)
Napoleon wasnt the attacker , British dont respect all article of Treaty of Amiens, vote war credit during peace time and afterall arrest french and hollandia ship when the come in british port, so napoleon answer with the blocus and he war was do
Don't say that ! English people don't love the truth. Napoléon is the bad guy and Waterloo is a british victory of course ! We all know
I’m sorry but building up an army in north France and threatening invasion is why the peace failed. Napoleon also tried to bring Spain in on his side by paying them huge amounts of gold.
No they both did not respect the treaty equally because they just do not trust each other
@@Unpseudopascommelesautres ur serious c faux
We have to understand that it's in the British national interest that no hegemon emerges on the continent, and that's why they were so anti-Napoleon because a hegemon on the continent could lead to the end of British naval dominance and would be a direct threat to British national security. Back in the days when Britain actually followed its national interest
fun fact napoleon has won the most battles out of all generals, meaning he is officially the greatest military general ever
Depends on how you you consider being the greatest general. As the famous quote states "you've won the battle but not the war". Winning lots of battles doesn't make you win the war for sure. Just take a look at Hannibal's conquest of Rome
A generals greatness cant be measured by the number of battles won
@@zsepirpapkendo3223
except he faced the superpowers of europe and the entire continent.
while maintaining total political power.
no one had ever done that.
you may not lost a single battle but what napoleon faced is out of everyones grasp.
Whoa... more than Hannibal Barca?
@@zsepirpapkendo3223 but by the impact of their actions...well look at that: civil law code of most western nations, one of europe's greatest harbors, metric system...I think the adagio actions speak louder than words do fit the man.
Napoleon built the modern world. Anyone who battles monarchy is a friend of mankind.
Oh, and then he went and crowned himself emperor. Therein lies the ambiguity.
It's been 6 years, but before turning himself into a monarch the republic was already dead. So it made sense to transition to a more powerful rule. Not to mention his true aim after becoming consul was to build a Dynasty
Even if some people here think he was this giant conquerer of Europe and that he was all bad I would still fight in his army just because he is one the greatest Generals the world has ever seen and I'm betting many people would agree.
also he respected his soldiers a lot more then most other generals did at the time I mean his old guard had the right to complain to him openly about some of the most stupidest and smallest things.
I sure as hell wouldn't. Not necessarily because of any judgement of him but of the style of warfare that was practiced. Just line up load and fire hoping you hit someone despite not aiming and then charge in with bayonets.
When Napoleon invades some European nation (even though he was on defence in more than half of the wars) he is bad. But if European powers invades large parts of Asia and Africa, they are not?
Would you really like serve in any army during that period? The punishments are painful and the rewards are pillage.
@@vincegalila7211 You definetly didn't want to serve in his army because he was too ambitious for his own good. He'd constantly force you in pointless wars for ego and glory.
history vs Cromwell
+Chick Norton What Cromwell, Oliver or Thomas?
Pablo Aragon oliver
+Pablo Aragon oliver
+Chick Norton pretty sure the dude was plain and simply a dick
James Jesus isn't he loved in the UK and did he not do things for it.
0:08 This famous scene from a painting does NOT represent the French Revolution, but the july revolution of 1830.
The history vs. series is literally imo one if the best on TH-cam. Please don't stop making them.
They didn't listen to you it seems
These take a while!
Could you do History vs. Julius Caesar?
Why? As far as I am aware, Julius Caesar is generally regarded as being one of the greatest Roman emperors(I am aware he technically wasn't emperor, but dictator for life fits the description well enough In my opinion) and is considered by many to be the greatest human being in history.
redbaron5247 That is one opinion people have. But if you were not aware many also see him as power hungry genocidal fascist who destroyed the Roman republic and is responsible for the crazy emperors. He is quite divisive with much debate if his assassination was justified. The general opinion is usually between the extremes. Anyway I think he would be good for the series with many hating him and many loving him with a huge impact he had on history.
Theres even controversy in the comments
@@redbaron5247 Caesar was neither an emperor nor a king. Perhaps he could've become a king, but Brutus chimed in with others to keep the Senate the strongest organ in the Republic.
Iva F. he was a king in all but a name. He was power hungry, he gave himself nearly all the titles to exist in his time. A love Caesar, but he neither good or bad for sure)
He is pretty much the reason why Switzerland even came into existence, so I can't be angry of him... the people in Switzerland are probably the most politically sovereign people in the world, and also one of the wealthiest...
Switzerland is the absolute model country.
la Suisse, un pays admirable
Wizard Brackenbury It is indeed. At least concerning the political system.
Merthalophor Beautiful landscape, great food, nice cities, interesting history, very intellectual and industrious. I think it is the best country to live in.
Wizard Brackenbury Possibly. Only Finnland and Sweden can compete.
100% info
100% accuracy
0% things we can do
I actuly like Napoleon, i think that he has been the single most important man as of yet in history
+WaiGee Actually, I think that's Hitler, but in a bad way
SGrint
Different times, different ideologies, different means, but what they try to do, it's the same that a lot of people try to do, basically since ever: Join Europe. Even today that happens, The EU it's basically another form of doing that. They all eventually fail. I wonder why...
It is not a bad thing to unite Europe, it's a bad thing to do it with force, and under a dictator. I honestly would have no problem if a United States of Europe emerged peacefully. It would ensure that European countries won't go to war with each-other anymore, and I think that a peacefully united Europe would be very beneficial for e.g. the economy. Also a democratic state is much more stable. So far Europe has only been united by dictators, that's why it has failed every time.
SGrint
Why to unite Europe under one political view? the more polotics try to do something, the more they fuck things up. Borders are stupid, and i sure think one coin is very handy. But the more politics try to do something, the worst. Let people live they life, and Europe will be in peace. even with all the differences, and nobody feel as european, I thing europeans really respect one another. Even those countryies with historical rivalries, people get along just fine. Stop try to make "one Europe", we are not "one Europe", we are a lot of countries that really respect one another. And that is just perfect.
+SGrint US/Canada would need to join first, then Greenland/Iceland, then merge with the European Union (which at some point is pretty much inevitably going to become a federation with a capital in what was formerly Germany).
You forgot mentioning that Napoleon wars were also an inspiration to the Spanish Colonies in South America to start their Independence wars.
He told me he was a little baby boy
What happened?
He trick sire.
You mean I was the little baby boy
(Tsar Alexender gets blown up by a cannonball)
But he kiss me
@@tanapatyangkaew4649
You wouldn't get it Pierre,
No one won't ever kiss you
(Sobbing)
English propaganda always effective and has no last date of usage. Evils.
It is not true for most of the times and plus he and literally everyone would use propaganda
I agree Napoleon’s the victim of English propaganda. But Napoleon sure knew how to run his own propaganda machine
Napoleon was one of the worst human beings to have ever disgraced this earth.
@@mrhorse6587 actually, despite some terrible colonial actions, he’s one of the biggest givers of rights in all history
@@fredbarker9201 There was no propaganda in Napoleon regime his fame and eternal glory was achieved by pure military genius.
I remember in French class a week ago, we played some sort of card game. I had a really great strategy. (We only were 3 persons xD because our school got a threat). And one of the three of us, called me Napoleon... Even though I'm a female.
Fight for your beloved Napolea Bonaparte! (☉ ͜ʖ☉)
How is that for propaganda?
but why are you going to school if nobody else does?
not so strategic miss napolea
+Eve Just a Player "persons" great.
+Paco Cotero actually persons is being used more than people so its slowly becoming a noun
+Eve Just a Player Tu es de Lyon?
While napoleon isn't a complete saint he's a much better guy compared to other emperors
Especially bri'ish
I prefer the French over the British any day.
@@oksowhat bri'*sh
"This fun sized French guy is running rings around us" - Oversimplified
Studying about napoleon was one of the best and by far my most favourite thing to do in school
My children do art like what NAPOLEON did b4 they go 2 sleep. So I'm becha-mato
Copy this text ok......-'"^/!;?,._
☆⊙°□○•■●▪《☆》
..........Mom came pick me up pls..... am scared
2014: "What an amazing military leader"
2024: "There's nothing we can do"
History vs The British!
Gosh, they have destroyed so many civilizations! As a fellow Indian, I'd like to know your opinions on the matter!
That's how wars work, Even Napoleon stole many artifacts from Egypt and other Europeans countries too.
Thats the price of being defeated
I am french and I believe you are right but I would not blame the British more than us. France did it too and in some proportion India did it also to become the version of India that was before. Leading nations write History to their best advantage, this is why history cannot be seen as some exact science. Could you consider British or french domination over territories good or bad is a different story. The time needed to rewrite History with an ink made of regrets and you are already to the next page. I only wish humanity would have carried history to more peaceful ways but it is simply not in our DNA.
Then you can make a "history vs" video on alot of countries
Truly the British empire was the invading savage hoards
History vs. Julius Caesar
+Fake Name or Augustus
Julio Cesar? The goalkeeper?
''A true man hates no one.''
-Napoleon Bonaparte
And he is short probably
@@tanapatyangkaew4649 he just average. Duke of Wellington even shorter than Napoleon
@@harithdanial141 No, the Duke was actually quite tall. Napoleon was average height, yet in him contained all the world's ambition
@@50shekels Taller than James Madison!
Most apologetic line in the whole video : "What kind of equality is that?" *"The only kind that could be stably maintained at the time.."*
“Go not to TED-Ed for counsel, for they will say both no and yes.”
Tolkien said that.
Can a better picture be chosen for the Revolution of 1789 at 0:10 ? That picture by Delacroix is representing the Revolution of 1830, with people clothed in 1830 attire.
☝️🤓
Glad to see so many Napoleon fans here including myself!
The image he associates at the beginning vdeo to the French Revolution of 1789 is actually commemorating the [French] July Revolution of 1830. It's the famous "Liberty Leading the People" painting by Eugène Delacroix .... featured on Coldplay's "Viva la Vida" album (tangent). Get your visual symbols and references straight, man!
Alex Gendler vs History
I like how the British were claiming that France had become too powerful and must be stopped, yet they held most of the world. lol
France just wanted to survive bruh.
The balance of power is referring to mainland europe not the entire world even historians agree that germany during ww1 was the most powerful nation in mainland Europe despite it not being the largest country
@@oscarchoy9469 I agree with that. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
@@oscarchoy9469 Germany was by far the largest country by population in Europe if we somewhat exclude Russia. It had 68 million people against 52 for Austria-Hungary, 43 for UK and 41 for France
@@xanthuumnihyr5319 However there was no unified Germany back then.
@@LaFacedera He was taking about ww1
After seeing the oversimplified video on the Napoleonic wars, I'm glad I have a better context on how much of a badass Napoleon was
There are few people in history as incredible as Napoleon Bonaparte. Arguably the greatest military mind to walk this earth. I urge people to look more into him.
He was definitely average height for the time, if not a little taller. The Imperial Garde just needed a height requirement of 6 foot, so in comparison he looked small.
Half of Europe declared war on napoleon, not France but napoleon himself
Do one for George Armstrong Custer. Was he America's an incompetent, glory seeking and arrogant military officer who's belief in white supremacy was his downfall? Or was he an unfair victim of treason when his second in command willfully disobeyed his order to provide reinforcements at Last Stand hill? Or maybe he was both?
Maybe you should also have one for Custer's second in command Fredrick Benteen. Was he a wise tactician who retreated from a lost battle? Or was he a coward who refused to aid Custer when he was ordered to reinforce him at Last Stand Hill?
godzillavkk u know he was tricked by a native dressed as a union scout
Interesting
There is no defending him.
one of Custer's last quotes (More or less):
"I guess we'll get through with them...."
yes there is. What you mean is 'I am very closed minded' (and by I I mean you)
There's nothing we can do
Honestly,if France still had Napoleon,they could of done much more...LONG LIVE THE EMPEROR!
yeah they would never have given African countries thier "freedom" not that they wanted to do that anyway
Many ideologist think that the "Gaullism" (the principles and policies of Charles de Gaulle) is really similar to the "Bonapartism".
A French ideology which claims to be patriotic, believes in the greatness of France,is hated by the Britains, is supposed to be neither on the right nor on the left, consider that the compagnies should protect the workers like good fathers, is catholic but respect all religions, think that a great Leader is the best choice for France, but this Great Leader must consult his people by referendums of plebiscites.
the vast majority of Bonapartist parties or organizations have either become Gaullists or remained Bonapartist but still admire De Gaulle.
So yes, the Bonapartism exist, but it has evolved into the Gaullism.
@@adonis7626 sounds nice
Napoleon wasn't the worst or the best he was just really really important for our history today.
He is the best !
@@UnpseudopascommelesautresNo he wasn’t. Why can’t people just accept that we don’t need to be so opinionated about everything and everyone?! It’s very possible to be neutral. Of course, people will find ways to get upset with you regardless, but this further confirms my view that human beings are just worthless.
He was the necessary leader at that time..he wasn’t perfect but he shaped the new Europe
One fact I find interesting- the iconic image of him holding his hand to his stomach somewhat inside his shirt was because he was usually massaging it, because he dealt with frequent stomach pains. Modern theories suggest these pains were a side effect from a poison attempt