Napoleon the Great? A debate with Andrew Roberts, Adam Zamoyski and Jeremy Paxman
855,789
Published 2014-11-24
__________________________
www.intelligencesquared.com/events/napoleon-the-gr…
Filmed at the Emmanuel Centre on 8th October 2014.
‘There is no immortality but the memory that is left in the minds of men.’ – Napoleon Bonaparte
How should we remember Napoleon, the man of obscure Corsican birth who rose to become emperor of the French and briefly master of Europe?
As the 200th anniversary of the Battle of Waterloo approached in 2015, Intelligence Squared brought together two of Britain’s finest historians to debate how we should assess Napoleon’s life and legacy. Was he a military genius and father of the French state, or a blundering nonentity who created his own enduring myth? Was his goal of uniting the European continent under a common political system the forerunner of the modern ‘European dream’? Or was he an incompetent despot, a warning from history of the dangers of overarching grand plans?
Championing Napoleon was be Andrew Roberts who will argue that if any ruler deserves the epithet ‘the Great’ it should be Napoleon. Not only did he revolutionise warfare, but he transformed Europe by retaining the best parts of the French Revolution – equality before the law, religious toleration, and the end of feudalism. He founded the first modern code of law (the Code Napoleon), instituted the excellent Lycée-based education system, and created a new aristocracy based on talent.
By contrast, all mention of Napoleon as ‘great’, ‘hero’, ‘villain’ or ‘monster’ has Adam Zamoyski running for the hills, bemused why - in his opinion - this rather ordinary man excites such passion in otherwise level-head intelligent people. Zamoyski argued that Napoleon is credited with creating civil institutions which were in fact the work of others. He perpetrated some of the greatest military blunders in history, including the disastrous invasion of Russia. He brought about his own downfall through a mixture of incompetence and megalomania. It’s understandable why the French cling to their poetic myth of Napoleon’s ‘greatness’ but to Zamoyski no self-respecting Brit, let alone an historian, should fall for the flim-flam of this shameless self-publicist.
All Comments (21)
-
He doesn't need to be called great he has a whole era named after him
-
Well if he wasn't "Great", there won't be a 1.5 hr debate on this point, about 200 years after his death, and that too in a country which was France's arch nemesis.
-
guy writes 4 books about the same man guy: he's not that important
-
Zamoyski claims Napoleon wasn't a great military leader because he used bold and innovative tactics against enemies who didn't. I'm curious what Zamoyski thinks is great leadership if that doesn't apply.
-
Andrew Roberts had to fight such an uphill battle. Well done man.
-
it's nice when you come across debates where everyone involved is respectful to each other. i get sick of watching debates where the debaters are at each others throats.
-
“He did win a few battles” lost the whole debate on the spot right there haha
-
he fought sixty battles and lost only seven. For any general, of any age, this was an extraordinary record. Yet his greatest and most lasting victories were those of his institutions, which put an end to the chaos of the French Revolution and cemented its guiding principle of equality before the law. Today the Napoleonic Code forms the basis of law in Europe and aspects of it have been adopted by forty countries spanning every continent. Napoleon’s bridges, reservoirs, canals and sewers remain in use throughout France. The French foreign ministry sits above the stone quays he built along the Seine, and the Cour des Comptes still checks public spending. Even if Napoleon hadn’t been one of the great military geniuses of history, he would still be a giant of the modern era. The leadership skills he employed to inspire his men have been adopted by other leaders over the centuries, yet never equaled except perhaps by his great devotee Winston Churchill. When asked who was the greatest captain of the age, the Duke of Wellington replied: ‘In this age, in past ages, in any age, Napoleon.’ Elsewhere, Churchill described Napoleon as ‘the greatest man of action born in Europe since Julius Caesar,’ a plaudit of which Napoleon would profoundly have approved. Napoleon’s strategy was to ensure that, although he could always count on British hostility, there would be no moment when all three continental powers of Russia, Austria and Prussia would be ranged against him at the same time. He thus needed to play each off against the others, and as much as possible against Britain too. He used Prussia’s desire for Hanover, Russia’s inability to fight on after Friedland, a marriage alliance with Austria, the differences between Russia and Austria over the Ottoman Empire and the fear of Polish resurgence that all three powers felt to avoid having to fight the four powers simultaneously.That he achieved this for a decade after the collapse of the Peace of Amiens, despite clearly being the European hegemon that each power most feared, was a tribute to his statesmanship.
-
And furthermore, to assert that Napoleon's military victories were just a result of his opponents' incompetence is patently absurd.
-
If we're calling Ivan the Great then we can definitely call Napoleon the great.
-
Andrew Roberts is continually attacked and stands his ground even though the so-called moderator is against him this is not a fair intellectual space, they all had it out for him and he stood his ground. Well done sir.
-
The fact that this is the best that can be put against Napoleon really shows how good he is
-
Zamoyski's argument that Napoleon should not be considered "the Great" because of the lack of stability in his political legacy could be used to challenge Alexander the Great's epithet. I found this interesting and I actually see Napoleon in a slightly more positive light, now.
-
Wellington said that Napoleon's presence on the field of battle made the difference of 40,000 men. He was definitely great in my eyes, at least from a military point of view.
-
My conclusion is that Napoleon was indeed Great.
-
We don't call him Napoleon the Great because Napoleon's name implies greatness.
-
I love how friendly and genial they both are to each other despite their opposition to one another. I wish all debates were like this
-
Of course he is deserving of the distinction 'the Great'. But I wouldn't call him the great. For me the name Napoleon is as indicative of greatness as the word itself.
-
34:03 “This is the Moderator...” HILARIOUS 😂
-
"The study of it has given me a greater idea of his genius than any other" - Wellington on Napoleon's 1814 campaign
