Soldats, je suis fier de vous!

[King Henry V]

On this day, 2nd December, two hundred years ago, Napoleon Bonaparte smashed the combined armies of Austria and Russia near the village of Austerlitz. The battle was also to become know as the Battle of the Three Emperors.
I thought I would post this thread to show that I am not completely biased (as perhaps shown by my "Happy Waterloo Day" thread about 5 months ago).:duel:

[Kralizec]

I hadn't seen that thread, but gathering from the title I guess that you're no fan of Napoleon ~;)

I am. He's the greatest law giver since Justinian. A superb administrator whose influence can still be found in France but also in Netherlands and others. He invaded us, but the Dutch republic with its corrupt stadhouders and oligarchig merchants wasn't worth supporting anyway, while the regime under the French wings was one of enlightenment. Plus his conquests are simply amazing :bow:

Vive l'empereur Francais! :charge:

ps: I know other nations suffered because of him. The Spanish guerilla wars were terrible, but on the whole Napoleon doesn't seem worse then any other conquerer. Alexander the Great sacked Thebes, Tyr and Gaza but he's remembered chiefly for his achievements.

(edited because of slight grammar issue)

[Meneldil]

Vive l'empereur Francaise! :charge:



A suggestion : delete the 'e' at the end of 'Francais' :hide:

Yeah, anyway, Napoleon seriously kicked ass IMO.
Vive l'Empereur ! :knight:

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
Viva Nabulione Buonaparte! ~D E Corsu who never managed to speak French without an Italian accent. ~;)
.

[Duke Malcolm]

I thought I would post this thread to show that I am not completely biased (as perhaps shown by my "Happy Waterloo Day" thread about 5 months ago).:duel:

tsk tsk, I would expect better of you, King Henry... Not biased against the French... tch!

[Meneldil]

.
Viva Nabulione Buonaparte! ~D E Corsu who never managed to speak French without an Italian accent. ~;)
.


Heh, funny thing is that he was quite in favor of Corsica's independance in his early days.

[Spendios]

Vive l'Empereur ! Vive la France !

Too bad that our government didn't organize a real ceremony; we sent our one aircraft-carrier to the english celebration of Trafalgar and for the victory of Austerlitz we make nothing:no:

[Adrian II]

Nice pics (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/4495616.stm)

[Louis VI the Fat]

Aaah, the good old days when the world trembled in fear if the French donned on their uniforms and started marching...:knight:


Trivial fact of the day: the melted bronze of the Austrian cannons was used to build the column in the Place Vendôme, still to be admired this day.

[Strike For The South]

~;) Wow France was actually good at something once....wow~;)

[Meneldil]

Trivial Fact of the day : A few people are manifesting in France, because in their opinion, Napoléon was some kind of Hitlerian Stalinist. Most of them are black people, who claim that Napoléon tried to exterminate their ancestors.

[Duke Malcolm]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/11/26/wfra26.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/11/26/ixworld.html

There are more such things in my Sunday paper, the Scotland on Sunday, but I haven't the time to get them...

[Meneldil]

Well, a lot of crap if you ask me. Napoléon obviously treated harsly the black rioters in french colonies, but certainly not as this Claude Ribbe would like us to think.

I'm not even going to speak about the author. It's not the first time Claude Ribbet want the white population to feel guilty for slavery, even if it means spitting on its history. Almost all his books are blaming that king, that politician or that writer because they were racist or promoted slavery.

Oddly, although he'll manifest during the commemoration of Austerlitz, I never heard him bitching against the Muslims, who enslaved 10 times more people than the Europeans, or against the Black who did not hesitate to sell their fellows at a small cost.
The way the french black people identify themself at the light of 18th and 19th centuries slavery is kinda scary.

[Louis VI the Fat]

I was going to post a long reply, when I stumbled upon this. This pretty much sums it up and saves lazy Louis some time:
On the 200th anniversary of Napoleon's epoch-making victory at Austerlitz, the French government was being accused of political correctness Friday for failing to join commemorations for perhaps the most glorious battle in the country's military history.
Neither President Jacques Chirac nor Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin were to take part in an evening parade at the Place Vendome in central Paris, while Defence Minister Michele Alliot-Marie's visit to the battlefield in the modern-day Czech Republic was being described as purely private.
By contrast critics pointed ironically to France's enthusiastic participation in joint ceremonies with Britain earlier this year to mark the bicentenary of the naval battle of Trafalgar -- which was one of the nation's most crushing defeats.
Historians, editorialists and right-wing politicians chastised the government for bowing to the fashion for "self-flagellation" and refusing to grant Napoleon's stunning 1805 defeat of the Austro-Russian alliance its due place of honour in French and European history.
"Is the duty of memory supposed to be selective?" asked author Jean des Cars in the conservative daily Le Figaro. "One can only wonder when the commemorations for Napoleon's most famous victory are marked with such painful discretion."
"The truth is that it is not the done thing today to celebrate the victories of Napoleon," lamented France-Soir.
"But Austerlitz does not just belong to its general-in-chief ... The 9,000 French soldiers who fell there died for their homeland, and did so while crushing a coalition of aristocrat nations bent on subjugating France and restoring the old order."
For Lionnel Luca, of Chirac's Union for a Popular Movement (UMP) party, "The worst of it is this modern trend for repentance at all costs," while his colleague Andre Santini said the absence of an official commemoration was "a sign of a France in decline, a France which forgets its past."
The government's edginess appeared to be linked to an increasingly bitter debate in France over the country's recent past, and accusations that negative aspects of both the Napoleonic and colonial periods have been airbrushed from the textbooks.
The row -- which was given added spice by last month's rioting in France's high-immigration suburbs -- centres partly on a law passed by the National Assembly in February enjoining history teachers to stress the "positive role of the French presence overseas, especially in north Africa."
This has been attacked by the left as a blatant attempt to rewrite the past at the expense of black and Arab indigenous populations.
But at the same time a controversial book has brought Napoleon into the firing-line of anti-racist groups for the first time. In "The Crime of Napoleon" Claude Ribbe says the emperor was a genocidal dictator who exterminated blacks in the Caribbean and even used rudimentary gas-chambers in the holds of ships.
"All the facts contained (in the book) are known to historians but are wilfully overlooked," writes Ribbe, a black academic who sits on a government panel on human rights.
According to the Collective of Overseas French, Napoleon was also guilty of laws banning blacks from mainland France and inter-racial marriages. And by his 1802 order re-authorising the "triangular" trade after it was banned in the revolution, he consigned "200,000 Africans to slavery and more than a million to death."
Angry at what it says is official complaisance in the myth of Napoleonic glory, the collective has called for a protest demonstration in Paris Saturday -- even as thousands of enthusiasts are reenacting Austerlitz at the battle scene hundreds of miles (kilometres) to the east.
But many historians are concerned that obsessions of the moment are obscuring the task of objective analysis, and accuse the government of weakly bending to the political wind. "Two and a half centuries of French history have just been consigned to the rubbish-bin," wrote the internationally-renowned Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie.

[Adrian II]

I was going to post a long reply, when I stumbled upon this. This pretty much sums it up and saves lazy Louis some time:Quite funny, and rather striking: this more or less mirrors the British stories about political correctness during the Trafalgar commemoration.
:bow:

[King Henry V]

Trivial fact off the day: French cannons captured at Waterloo were melted down to make bollards in London.
I suppose the English are eminently more practical than the French, all I think a column would have been prettier.

[Meneldil]

Quite funny, and rather striking: this more or less mirrors the British stories about political correctness during the Trafalgar commemoration.
:bow:


What happened during the Trafalgar commemoration ?

As for Claude Ribbe's book, I think it's sometimes on the edge of revisionism.
I'm sure there will be a lot of TV shows and arguing on this issue (especially on Arte). I'll wait to hear each side's argument before condamning Ribbe as being the good old 'We can, and have to blame France for slavery' guy.

[Kraxis]

I believe there was a reenactment of the battle, but it was willfully denied to be Trafalgar but 'just another 19th century battle at sea', despite the fact that no other battle looked that way.

Btw, should we begin sending embassies to Rome and Mongolia demanding excuses for past crimes? I think we could get Iran in on it in both cases. And France would have a strong case against Rome, so would Spain and Germany.

[English assassin]

French cannons captured at Waterloo were melted down to make bollards in London.
I suppose the English are eminently more practical than the French, all I think a column would have been prettier.

Even more practical than his majesty thinks, they weren't melted down, just stuck in the ground on end. There are a lot of very cannon-shaped bollards in the City to this day.

Although there was some grumbling about the red fleet-blue fleet nonsense during the Trafalgar celebrations, the fact is we DID celebrate the battle, indeed my bookcase is today graced by a pump badge for some specially brewed celebration ale that I liberated on trafalgar night when the barman was distracted. I think its wrong that the French can't celebrate their great victories (manfully resists obvious joke).

I did notice though that the TV documentaries on Trafalgar spent more time telling us that there were a few black sailors there (and a couple of lesbians, the TV researchers must have been overjoyed when they found that out) as they did explaining how Nelson won the battle. So we aren't immune to this disease, far from it. As for this Ribbe bloke, everyone's got an idiot like that, but is he taken seriously?

[Spartakus]

I'm not even going to speak about the author. It's not the first time Claude Ribbet want the white population to feel guilty for slavery, even if it means spitting on its history. Almost all his books are blaming that king, that politician or that writer because they were racist or promoted slavery.

It's only natural. After all, if it had been your own people toiling as slaves throughout the centuries, stigmatizing you for ages to come, would you not grow bitter with this feeling of inferiority? I know I would, and that is why this Ribbe person is awfully transparent. Ideally, history shouldn't be written with a political agenda, as this strongly invites to falsify the facts in favour of the cause. But of course, the fact that one is able to do so to the detriment of one's own nation, serves only to demonstrate its tolerance and freedom.


Oddly, although he'll manifest during the commemoration of Austerlitz, I never heard him bitching against the Muslims, who enslaved 10 times more people than the Europeans, or against the Black who did not hesitate to sell their fellows at a small cost.

Ah, yes. I too have noticed this fact is often ignored. Do you remember how Cassius Clay, the boxer, changes his name to Mohammed Ali, as he regarded Cassius as his "slave-name"? Laughable, if a Roman name is a black person's slave name, then that is even truer for an Arabic name. ~:doh:

To get back on track; hail to Napoleon and his victory at Austerlitz. He was one of the greatest men of modern history, and the fact that he wasn't perfect is no valid argument for any opposing views.

[King Kurt]

Interesting debate comparing Austerlitz with Tralfalgar. Is the real arguement that Austerlitz was a magnificant victory, but in the long run Napoleon lost, whereas Tralfalgar mean't that Britian would never fall to France and that eventually they and their allies would be victorius. I believe the addage is that the only battle that has to be won is the last one.

There is no doubt that Napoleon made a lasting impact on Europe - although perhaps it was revolutionary france which was the bigger influence. If the great man had been as skillful a politician as he was a general, then may be things would have been different. Considering that he beat all the major European powers, he never seemed able to subdue them or enlist them to his cause. Was his greatest mistake to pursue power as opposed to political change? - would have fermenting revolution in Russia been better than invading? - some food for thought:san_rolleyes:

[Kraxis]

The Czecks actually had a large parade of 4000 enactors yesterday or something... So it seems anybody but the French get to have their fun.

[Meneldil]

Interesting debate comparing Austerlitz with Tralfalgar. Is the real arguement that Austerlitz was a magnificant victory, but in the long run Napoleon lost, whereas Tralfalgar mean't that Britian would never fall to France and that eventually they and their allies would be victorius. I believe the addage is that the only battle that has to be won is the last one.

There is no doubt that Napoleon made a lasting impact on Europe - although perhaps it was revolutionary france which was the bigger influence. If the great man had been as skillful a politician as he was a general, then may be things would have been different. Considering that he beat all the major European powers, he never seemed able to subdue them or enlist them to his cause. Was his greatest mistake to pursue power as opposed to political change? - would have fermenting revolution in Russia been better than invading? - some food for thought:san_rolleyes:


Well, Napoleon was probably as good as a politician than as a general. He achieved to stop the total mess happening in France after the Revolution, created many of our modern institutions (Code Civil, Code Pénal, Conseil d'Etat, Légion d'Honneur, Lycées, Banque de France, etc.). He united almost all the French, after a bloody civil war.

[Watchman]

He just kind of bit more than he could chew and ended up prompting most everyone else to gang up on him after the Russian fiasco. But them's the breaks.

[Atilius]

He achieved to stop the total mess happening in France after the Revolution, created many of our modern institutions (Code Civil, Code Pénal, Conseil d'Etat, Légion d'Honneur, Lycées, Banque de France, etc.). He united almost all the French, after a bloody civil war.

There is also a geometrical theorem ascribed to him: Napoleon's Theorem states that for any triangle, if we construct 3 equilateral triangles which each share one of the sides of the triangle, the centers of the the 3 equilateral triangles themselves form an equilateral triangle. The evidence that Napoleon was the first to prove this theorem (or ever did) is ahhh... thin, but he was a superb mathematics student at Autun and the Ecole Militaire, so it is possible that the attribution has merit. This mathematical skill was also responsible for his initial posting as an artillery officer.

And apparently he shared something with those of us loitering here in the monastery - here's a quote from a recent bio by Robert Asprey:

"He enjoyed geography but his passion was history, particularly the lives of great men so dramatically presented by Plutarch."

[King Kurt]

Well, Napoleon was probably as good as a politician than as a general. He achieved to stop the total mess happening in France after the Revolution, created many of our modern institutions (Code Civil, Code Pénal, Conseil d'Etat, Légion d'Honneur, Lycées, Banque de France, etc.). He united almost all the French, after a bloody civil war.
Perhaps I should have said diplomat as opposed to politician. I certainly would not deny him his achievements of uniting France and the internal achievements, but considering the strength of his military sucess, coupled with the welcome he would have had in areas where old regiemes had been overthrown such as Poland and Italy, he never managed to pacify mainland Europe. Perhaps he needed a Metternich to smooth the troubled waters.:san_cheesy:

[matteus the inbred]

To get back on track; hail to Napoleon and his victory at Austerlitz. He was one of the greatest men of modern history, and the fact that he wasn't perfect is no valid argument for any opposing views.

damn right Spartakus, there's no doubt he was one of the most interesting and complex men in history, even if he had a few problems!


Trivial fact of the day: the melted bronze of the Austrian cannons was
used to build the column in the Place Vendôme, still to be admired this day.
according to A. G. Macdonnell (who is neither the most objective nor accurate source around, i admit), the bronze used to make the column after Austerlitz was captured and presented by the man of the hour, Marshal Soult, who owed the emperor for 49,000lb of bronze used the previous year for a similar monument in northern France...!
it might not be the most accurate book ever written (Macdonnell refuses to supply his sources on the grounds that it's easy to lie about what sources you used...!) but Napoleon and His Marshals is an interesting read. and proves just how talented Napoleon was, because of the thirty odd professional, talented senior generals employed by him, only a few could do anything like what he did with an army.
the Asprey biog mentioned by Meneldil is probably the best i've ever read about Napoleon though.