Military Review

Napoleon: on the other side of the legend

51
August 15 marks 244 since the birth of Napoleon Bonaparte. Does the true image of the great commander convey to us the legends of him?


Napoleon: on the other side of the legend

Among historical there are few leaders of the first rank whose life and work would be studied more closely than those of Napoleon. The emperor of the French, holding his hand between the buttons of his vest in ceremonial portraits, or the commander of troops on the battlefield with a telescope and an indispensable cocked hat, is an image familiar to everyone from childhood. This visual series is accompanied by an accompanying event environment.

Here young Bonaparte rushes to the attack on Arkolsky bridge, and here in the Egyptian sands he reminds soldiers that “40 of centuries have been looking at them from the height of the pyramids”. And next to it is Napoleon, a mature and at the same time stiffened, who stands under cannon fire at the Preussish-Eylau cemetery or looks at the fire of Moscow. Then - a defeat, a silent retreat to the borders of France, a nervous twitch at Waterloo, masterfully depicted by Rodney Styger in the eponymous film by Sergey Bondarchuk.

“He was born on an island, he wanted to conquer the island all his life and died on the island,” represents Napoleon Talleyrand at the beginning of one of the commander’s numerous film biographies. In this strange triangle - Corsica, England, Saint Helena - denoting not so much geography as many different epochs, the main outline of Bonaparte’s life unfolds. Life, fascinated since then many writers, poets, composers, not to mention the political figures of later times.

The uniqueness of his fate was perfectly realized by his contemporaries, from Beethoven to Byron. At the end of his life, already at Saint Helena, Napoleon himself exclaimed: “What a novel my life!” The overthrown emperor, perhaps with his intuition, felt the approach of an era of romanticism, for which he would become one of the key characters. Fate, which lifted him out of petty or, as they would say in Russia, fine-minded nobles and made the ruler of France first, and then of Europe, in order to later mercilessly deprive of everything - the throne, the family, the Homeland, could not but excite the imagination. Quietly dying in 1821, Napoleon soon returned, for example, in the “Airship” of Lermontov, where

From the grave then the emperor
Waking up suddenly is;
He wears a triangular hat
And gray martial coat


However, these fantasies to some extent materialized when the ashes of Napoleon were transported from Saint Helena to France, where he finally rest in the House of Invalids. But if romanticism also gradually receded into the past, the Napoleonic legend, on the contrary, only grew stronger over the years. In France after the defeats of 1870, the most severe losses of 1914-1918. and then the humiliating occupation of 1940 d. Napoleon became an expression of national pride. The old continental rivals, as generations passed, began to put a person higher and higher, who was almost officially called the "Corsican monster." In Russia, for example, many after Pushkin could be sure that

Praise! he is to the Russian people
High draw indicated
And peace to the eternal freedom
From the gloom links bequeathed


Since the anti-Napoleonic coalition won, the European society unwittingly supported the Napoleonic myth itself, because otherwise the victory would not look convincing. In fact, Russia, Britain, Prussia, Austria, Sweden, Spanish partisans, small German states - and France alone is against them.

In reality, the situation was much more complicated, but these "nuances" do not penetrate into the mass consciousness. Where, however, there is a famous replica of Napoleon, who equated his personal military contribution to a hundred thousand soldiers: "Fifty thousand and I am one hundred fifty thousand." Try it, win. But the victory was won, and it became the most important national point of reference - in Britain, in Russia, and especially in Prussia.



It is appropriate to say here that not only the patriotic pride of the French or their victorious enemies ensured the vitality of the legend, not only an extraordinary fate, which would be enough for a dozen biographies, but also, as they would say now, Napoleon’s talent Public Relations areas. The phrases uttered by him on one occasion or another and included in the annals thanks to the reminiscences of contemporaries or the fantasies of enthusiastic biographers constitute an integral part of the classical image no less than a "gray walking coat."

"Donkeys and scientists in the middle!" "Neither red caps nor red heels." “Write short and unclear” - all this has also become a kind of “classic”. Just as the inevitable "From great to funny - just one step." For Bonaparte himself, “great” was, of course, all that he achieved on the battlefield right up to 1812. But what was funny?

The outcome of the Patriotic War made ridiculous plans and forecasts that the conqueror made before starting it, but laughter was hardly the dominant feeling among relatives and close hundreds of thousands who died on it from both sides. On such "trifles" the legend usually does not stop, as well as on how the retreating French troops at some point experienced such moral decay that they reached cannibalism. These crude realities of war do not correspond to Napoleonic pathos.

Kiss the banners of the Old Guard at the first renunciation - please. Hug Alexander in Tilsit in 1807 - as much as you like. But neither tens of thousands of civilians in the streets of the Spanish Zaragoza in 1809, nor the Russian peasants killed by the Napoleonic army on the road from Smolensk to Moscow and back do not climb into the legend and do not linger in the mass consciousness.

Napoleon came to power in France at the moment when, according to the general feeling, the state mechanism of the country was in a state close to disintegration. The predatory oligarchy, which took control of the uncontrolled power as a result of the French Revolution, provoked one crisis after another, plunging the country into the abyss of corruption, lawlessness, and wars, which the farther, the less looked like defensive.

In 1799, this regime was nearing its final, as evidenced by the various conspiracies to change it, and mature from the inside. Bonaparte, who left the army in Egypt, which was awaited by the inevitable defeat, was at the right moment in the right place. His participation in the Brumerian coup was due, on the one hand, to his popularity among the people, and on the other, to certain informal arrangements at the top.

However, the “conditions” taken on themselves in the case of Bonaparte were much easier than those of Anna Ioannovna, and, moreover, much more extensible. He had to restore order, create a working state mechanism, throw enemies from the French borders and establish civil peace in the republic.

As always, at first, the new head of state did exactly what was expected of him. Napoleon defeated the Austrians, muffled the armed resistance of the Chouans in Brittany, reformed the legislative and executive bodies of state power. Not very noticeably, they acquired a personalistic coloring: the first face appeared, on which the state apparatus as a whole gradually depended.

This configuration was based largely on military successes. Victories in wars became not only a means to defeat the enemies of France, but also the main way to consolidate the inner power of the commander, to make it indisputable, not subject to any criticism. All this was accompanied by the gradual tightening of the screws, the abolition of even the relative freedom of the press that existed before, references and executions of various opponents of the regime, the formation of a police apparatus under the leadership of the revolutionary terrorist Fouche.

Against the background of seemingly benevolent events like the conclusion of a long-awaited peace with other powers, the signing of a concordat with the Catholic Church or the streamlining of legislation (the famous "Napoleon Code") suddenly began to show features of a ruler who is not holding back anything. Opponents of the regime were subjected to executions both “left” and “right”. The most famous of the massacres was the execution of the Duke of Enghien - a member of the House of Bourbons, falsely accused of conspiracy.

At the same time, Napoleon’s power was based in no small measure on victories over external enemies, which naturally led him to new and new foreign policy adventures, which ultimately meant the prolongation of the war to infinity. Replacing the first consul who had ceased to arrange his post for the title of emperor, the new ruler of France led the war against England, Austria, Russia, Prussia, etc. The longer these wars went on, the more frustrating it became in France itself. But the emperor the farther, the more intolerant of this attitude of the French elites.

Those people who helped him in 1799, gradually fell into disgrace. And the wars, which at the beginning of Napoleon’s rule could be called defensive, became shamelessly aggressive, aggressive. The “Savior”, whom Napoleon saw as the post-revolutionary French elites, turned into an insatiable ambitious man, a man who could not stop, who ultimately did much more harm than good.

The continental blockade, which was designed to safeguard the interests of the French business class, ultimately demanded such sacrifices for its survival, which ceased to justify itself. And its preservation has become a system that requires more and more victims.

Not surprisingly, with the onset of defeats, the Napoleon system began to burst at the seams - first in Europe and then in France itself, where not only peasants and workers, but also businessmen and representatives of the military elite that Napoleon was trying to create. The overthrow of Bonaparte was no less an intra-French affair than the achievement of the anti-French coalition.

In 1814, as many historians have noted, Napoleon fell victim not only to external defeats, but also to the clearly expressed mood of the army, which refused to continue the senseless war. A brief return during the "100 days" could not change anything. Napoleon was incompatible with the very stability that many relied on in 1799.

In Marx’s light hand, in historiography, the opinion of Napoleon was largely reduced to a formula about a man who coped with the revolution at home and then transferred it abroad. Usually, this is understood as the various "anti-feudal reforms" implemented in Europe from Spain to Prussia. But it would be more fair to say that Napoleon transferred to Europe the absence of any rules erected in principle, which caused gradually increased resistance from the peoples who found themselves in the orbit of the French Empire.

Hence the war with Napoleon, in which compromise became a problem. The logic of unlimited conquest turned into a boomerang - a situation in which even large concessions no longer satisfy the enemy who wants to deal with the threat once and for all.

P SЃS,RѕSЂRoSЏ RќR ° RїRѕR "RμRѕRЅR ° â €" SЌS,Rѕ RoSЃS,RѕSЂRoSЏ SЂR ° F · RѕSЂRμRЅRoSЏ R¤SЂR ° RЅS † RoRo, RіRoR ± RμR "Ryo RјRoR" P "RoRѕRЅR ° C" SЂR ° RЅS † · SѓR RѕRІ (RЅRμ RіRѕRІRѕSЂSЏ of the PS ... RґSЂSѓRіRoS RЅR ° SЂRѕRґR ° C ...) RґRμS "RѕSЂRјR ° C † RoRo SЌRєRѕRЅRѕRјRoRєRo, RїRѕRїS <S,RѕRє RїSЂRμRІSЂR S,RoS,SЊ ° F • RІSЂRѕRїSѓ RІRѕ C" SЂR ° RЅS † SѓR · SЃRєRoR№ RґRѕRјRμRЅ C ‡ ‡ S,Rѕ RїSЂRѕS,RoRІRѕSЂRμS Röhr "of the PS RoRЅS,RμSЂRμSЃR ° Rј RЅRμ S,RѕR" SЊRєRѕ RμRІSЂRѕRїRμR№SЃRєRoS ... RЅR ° SЂRѕRґRѕRІ, RЅRѕ Ryo SЃR RјRoS ° C ... "SЂR ° RЅS † SѓR · RѕRІ, RєRѕS ‚РѕСЂС‹ Рј РїСЂРёС… РѕРґРёР RѕSЃSЊ RїR "P ° R · P S,RoS,SЊ SЌS,Rѕ ° C ‡ RμRј RґR ° F» € SЊS Rμ, S,RμRј F ± RѕR "SЊS € † RμRЅSѓ SѓSЋ C. RS,Rѕ RoSЃS,RѕSЂRoSЏ RїSЂRμRІSЂR ° C ‰ RμRЅRoSЏ RіRѕSЃSѓRґR ° SЂSЃS,RІR ° PI SЃRІRѕRμRіRѕ SЂRѕRґR ° ± RїRѕRґRѕR RoRμ RІRѕRμRЅRЅRѕRіRѕ P "P ° RіRμSЂSЏ Ryo SЂR ° F · SЂSѓS € RμRЅRoSЏ RјRЅRoRјRѕR№ In" SЃS,R ° F ± Röhr " ьности »РІ Р ± РµСЃРєРѕРЅРµС З РЅРѕСЃС‚Рё РІРѕР№РЅ. RS Р RsЃS Р RsSЂREёЏ SЂR ° SЃS ... Rsѕ¶¶ґґµЅЅёёЏ ° °Џ ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° РїСЂРёР · РІР ° Р »Рё его Рє РІР» Р ° сти. RS‚Рѕ история РІРѕР№РЅ, РІ РєРѕС‚РѕСЂС ‹С ... РїРѕРіРёР ± Р» Рѕ Р ± РµСЃС ‡ РёСЃР »РµРЅРЅРѕРµ множеѴвЎЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЁЅ RSвРѕ, РЅР ° РєРѕРЅРµС †, история Р »РёС ‡ РЅС‹ С ... Р ° РјР ± РёС † РёР№, стР° РІС € РёС… РїСЂСЏРјРѕР РРРР °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °Р °РРРРРРРРРРРРРРРРСРРРРРРРРрствР°.

But the Napoleonic legend is too strong to accept what was said. Probably there is some truth in this, for the legend is not something false, but there are selected facts from the life story of the one who gave birth to this legend. The eternal duality of Napoleon is inevitable. Not so much “rebellious liberty heir and murderer”, how many people who seemed to the French post-revolutionary elites a suitable candidate for the role of the one who put things in order,

Bonaparte destroyed their hopes with their aggressive wars. But in history, he will always be the one who defeated the two emperors at Austerlitz or “blew on Prussia” so that it ceased to exist for 6 days. Whatever the sober assessment of Bonaparte’s impact on French society, the mass consciousness will remember his “triumphal procession” in France in 1815, or his very first steps, including the assault of Toulon in 1793.

The legend lives, and in the very fact, one can probably discern the duality of human nature, which was called “citizen Bonaparte” in 1790-s, and “Your imperial majesty” in the second half of 1800's.
Originator:
http://www.pravmir.ru/
51 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Corsair
    Corsair 17 August 2013 06: 58 New
    +1
    About a lot and in general.

    And very little about the "little man and great commander" ...
    1. xetai9977
      xetai9977 17 August 2013 08: 13 New
      +3
      Napoleon, along with Alexander the Great and Caesar, is a commander from God. The talent is unconditional. It can be differently related to his personality, but a brilliant military gift cannot be taken from him.
      1. Hleb
        Hleb 17 August 2013 08: 26 New
        +5
        but how can we treat him differently? we can at least have one relationship with him. he, like Hitler (who is also not deprived of talents), went to conquer our lands and kill us. they are in the same row. he definitely vrazhin
        1. Alexander D.
          Alexander D. 17 August 2013 13: 30 New
          0
          Quote: Gleb
          but how can we treat him differently? we can at least have one relationship with him. he, like Hitler (who is also not deprived of talents), went to conquer our lands and kill us. they are in the same row. he definitely vrazhin

          He did not want to be a "feud" for the Russian Empire. He fought all his life for the blockade and destruction of Great Britain. You yourself now sleep and see how the "island empire" is bending, and he really did something for this. He wanted to completely isolate Great Britain, and if Emperor Alexander would help him with this, then all would be happy except for Prime Minister William Pitt. And Sashka-Moscow began to put sticks in the wheels, so Bonaparte went to Moscow for diplomatic negotiations, and as an argument he took with him 650 soldiers, half of whom he left in the occupied countries along the road to Borodino.
          1. Hleb
            Hleb 17 August 2013 14: 13 New
            +5
            nowhere! in any topic you will not find my words, with a meaning hinting at the desire to "bend" England. although I consider enemies!
            I won’t argue about Napoleon, I won’t convince me! no matter how you try to interpret his goals ... our people died. our houses were burning ... and I don’t give a damn who he wanted to punish in Europe. .... ut each other there. but if your loved one died as a result of some kind of "games", it is interesting to look at your emotions ... I would not be surprised if in a hundred years your grandchildren would say the same thing about Hitler. supposedly he wanted to liquid the Jews, while you "saw their bend" and he was Hitler the Great and did the right thing for us ... well, our people died, well, "Moscow burned with fire" ... didn’t want to?
            You can dream up on this subject oh-oh how much. And imagine it in a not so black perspective. Yes?
            "did not want to be virulence-SUMPTUOUSLY!
  2. taseka
    taseka 17 August 2013 07: 03 New
    +8
    It’s a little hooked that there is Napoleon cognac, but there is no Suvorov cognac! Although Alexander Vasilievich will give 100 points forward to the little emperor!
    1. Alexander D.
      Alexander D. 17 August 2013 13: 25 New
      -6
      Quote: taseka
      It’s a little hooked that there is Napoleon cognac, but there is no Suvorov cognac! Although Alexander Vasilievich will give 100 points forward to the little emperor!

      Napoleon lost only one battle in his life - at Waterloo. So it’s not a fact.
      Napoleon crossed the Alps a little earlier than Suvorov, but they never met. Therefore, it is impossible to unequivocally state who is stronger. Read E. Tarle "Napoleon".
      1. taseka
        taseka 17 August 2013 14: 00 New
        +5
        Quote: Alexander D.
        So it’s not a fact.

        And Suvorov A.V. gave 60 battles and did not suffer defeat in any! Read the story.
        1. Egen
          Egen 20 August 2013 06: 36 New
          0
          Quote: taseka
          And Suvorov A.V. gave 60 battles and did not suffer defeat in any! Read the story

          What to compare, Suvorov is a commander, purely IMHO is more talented in THIS Napoleon, and Napoleon is a statesman in the first place, the French revere him even more than we do Peter 1. Napoleon created a team of marshals, as they say now :), in general, not bad. And not by birthright, as it was then very well in Russia, but by reason. Again, in modern terms, Napoleon is a more successful manager :)
          But about the trip to Russia, IMHO, he simply had no choice not to go - he had to realize the capabilities of the troops and the mood of the people somewhere. The empire lived in war - both glory and loot. How to switch to a peaceful life, transfer a war machine to a peaceful path? The difficult question was that Napoleon was surrounded by strong military men, not economists. I think people would not understand and Napoleon’s rating would drop. And despite all his veneration, there would be those who wanted to grab power. Therefore, not seeing another way, Npoleon simply had to continue the war ...
          1. taseka
            taseka 21 August 2013 17: 53 New
            0
            Quote: Egen
            Napoleon is a more successful manager:

            Maybe for whom the manager is, but for me it’s not very different from Hitler - both aggressors have destroyed many of our people's lives! Do not idealize him - he is the enemy of Russia!
  3. My address
    My address 17 August 2013 07: 29 New
    +1
    But the gold of France at the Brazen-Saxons did not hold. Unlike ours.
  4. Enot-poloskun
    Enot-poloskun 17 August 2013 07: 36 New
    +7
    And yet Napoleon Bonaparte is a great man! Evil genius!

    About cognacs. the so-called "cognac" Napoleon - bad brandy. Surely, the British invented.
    By the way, there is Suvorov cognac, 40 years of aging, and ... Kutuzov cognac.

    Our responded on the offensive cognac vodka counterattack))) Vodka "Suvorov" and "Kutuzov")))

    The most important weapon in the fight against cognacs bearing the name of the great Corsican is Borodino bread)))
  5. vitek1233
    vitek1233 17 August 2013 08: 27 New
    0
    Napoleon The great commander, like other great commanders who really wanted to flee to Russia, forgetting about everything
  6. individual
    individual 17 August 2013 09: 42 New
    +3
    This is how journalists describe the events ...
    Publication Names:
    1. The bloody monster broke the chains, escaped from the island of "Elba";
    2. Bonaparte got to Marseille;
    3. The legitimate emperor of France, Napoleon, solemnly entered Paris!
    1. alone
      alone 17 August 2013 10: 24 New
      +3
      The media were still corrupt)))
  7. sevtrash
    sevtrash 17 August 2013 10: 01 New
    +2
    The greatest commander of all time. Lost, probably, only one battle - Waterloo. Borodino, rather, ended closer to a draw. But as a politician, he was not at the level of his own abilities in military affairs. Which is even somehow strange - basically the same thing.
  8. lesnik340
    lesnik340 17 August 2013 10: 55 New
    -3
    Not something new, another look at the past.
    I barely read it.
    article minus.
  9. Tver
    Tver 17 August 2013 11: 31 New
    +3
    In general - not bad! The phenomenon of legend is clearly indicated: the majority (and the majority is mediocrity) notices only his victories, and the victims and losses (even of their own peoples) pass by consciousness. It is especially surprising that even Russian officers (and local commentators) fall into a romantic mood with memories of Napoleon. And then, in the ruin and burning of Moscow?!? The Pussy Rayot justifiably provokes indignation at their trick, and the French desecrated hundreds of churches and ... nothing !!! "Leader of God" !! A huge national heritage is irretrievably lost and ... "from the grave then the emperor waking up is suddenly" Stsatier - PLUS !!
    1. Yura
      Yura 17 August 2013 16: 54 New
      +3
      Quote: Tver
      The phenomenon of legend is clearly indicated: the majority (and the majority is mediocrity) notices only his victories, and the victims and losses (even of their own peoples) pass by consciousness.

      A good comment, plus, my opinion regarding these "ingenious" conqueror generals is even more radical, they are banal killers and robbers who solve their minor local problems at the expense of others, they simply don’t know about the victims, their place in hell in that bonfire and threw firewood during his lifetime.
  10. ivshubarin
    ivshubarin 17 August 2013 11: 55 New
    +1
    Yes, how many great generals about Russia have broken their teeth. And so it all started well for him.
  11. ImPerts
    ImPerts 17 August 2013 12: 14 New
    +4
    Napoleon is a great tactician. His actions during the battle predetermined victory. There were losses. There have been. But Kutuzov turned out to be a great strategist. And then the braid of magnificent tactics stumbled upon the stone of the strategic gift of the gift of Russian commanders (I consider them Russian).
    Napoleon about Borodino: - “Of all my battles, the most terrible one I gave near Moscow. The French showed themselves worthy of victory in it, and the Russians gained the right to be invincible ... Of the fifty battles I have given, [the French] showed the most valor and the least success in the battle of Moscow. ”
    Bonaparte was a brilliant tactician, but a mediocre strategist. As soon as the Russian army stopped playing according to generally accepted rules and did not allow itself to be defeated in one general battle, Napoleon’s problems as a commander began here. To Borodino, Napoleon realized that this military campaign of fame would not bring him. This explains the long stay of Bonaparte in Vilna. Everything did not go according to his plan. And Vilna is June 1812. It was still far from frost. Frost finished the remnants of his army. But not more. To write off everything to a distance and frost is incorrect.
    And finally :-)
    Kutuzov: ““ It should comfort me that I am the first general before whom Bonaparte is fleeing like this. ”
  12. washi
    washi 17 August 2013 12: 27 New
    +2
    And if they hadn’t killed Paul 1?
    Napoleon did not want to fight with us. He wanted together - against England. Already there were plans, and our troops advanced into Central Asia.
    1. Babon
      Babon 17 August 2013 12: 44 New
      +2
      It is not known how long Suvorov was alive, of course, he did not want to fight with us, how he drove the French everywhere, by the way, the French generally don’t remember in their history (about Suvorov).
    2. Egen
      Egen 20 August 2013 06: 41 New
      0
      Quote: Vasya
      And if they hadn’t killed Paul 1? Napoleon didn’t want to fight us. He wanted together - against England

      But the probability of this "if" is very small. Hto would give Russia and France to be friends ?! The British are not fools that they would just be sitting looking? IMHO, they allowed Russia to be friends with France on the verge of the 20 century only because they were more afraid of Germany and at the same time pitted Russia with it, and through France they helped Russia so that the opponents more drained each other. Elementary ...
  13. Babon
    Babon 17 August 2013 12: 42 New
    +2
    Napoleon is a great PR man. This man was the first to understand the power of the media, with him there were constantly journalists who trumpeted all his minor victories. A lot of his victories are greatly exaggerated in importance. For Austerlitz, special thanks to the allies of the Austrians, who threw all their forces on the road leading to Vienna, and threw our guard alone against the main forces of Napoleon. In those days, it was believed that a retreat of 2 km from the battlefield was a defeat. So he won a lot of tactical victories like this, but strategically he had a lot of mistakes. The same Spaniards and Portuguese have a completely different opinion about Napoleon. On the territory of Russia, there was nothing for our army to fight for destruction, our own land, our people will help both the wounded and the army’s food, why give a battle to complete destruction? Here Napoleon constantly gained tactical victories. By no means always such crushing victories he won. But his PR people worked great.
  14. Tver
    Tver 17 August 2013 13: 11 New
    +2
    Awesome !! Nobody wants to know even their story! Why did Suvorov win in the center of Europe? A few years later, a motley team calmly crossed our border. Why did they surrender Moscow? Why ... "if they hadn’t killed Paul the First, .." if this asshole hadn’t been killed, Peter would have burned down. Why did the Russians persecute all Europeans in the 18th century, and in 19 they barely coped with the Hanoverians, Saxons and the rest of the trash ?? There are no articles explaining the number of foreigners in top command positions. Three quarters of the people from the Military Cabinet (gallery of distinguished officers) are foreigners! They remember Suvorov only from the film of the Stalin era, but not gu-gu. "If Pavel had not been killed" ... If he had been removed before, Napoleon might have been stopped near Smolensk. Since then, Russia could no longer effectively confront the European armies. And it came to the point that they even lost to the Japs in 1905, and even the unfortunate Amer marines beat them.
    1. Babon
      Babon 17 August 2013 13: 19 New
      +3
      If you look who beat whom, then you are right. I studied Russian-Japanese, so everything inside rotted. Many who did everything to defeat Russia domestically, pursued political goals. Here, learn the actions of Admiral Rozhdestvensky, it was pure treason! And behind him stood a certain Witte, not the last person in the state. And A. N. Kuropatkin? He was also connected with the Witte circle, here you have Russian-Japanese. And against Witte there was a camp of Stolypin.
      1. Tver
        Tver 17 August 2013 13: 47 New
        +4
        Unfortunately a lot (in 1904-05) was simpler and more complex at the same time. Rozhdestvensky began his career with the betrayal of his commander Butakov. He conducted almost the first effective torpedo attack in the world, but did not hit the Grand Duke (which I don’t remember, and indeed Gottorpa did not like extraordinary personalities). And Rozhdestvensky in time assented: "... yes, they say, the captain is so-so! And the attack was not entirely clean ..." And he climbed uphill and climbed until the time of surrender. Makarov was with us, he could do everything the Japanese fleet canceled, but ... The "law of meanness" has already begun to operate. The best generals and admirals quickly perished, and mediocrity and sneak climbed up and down. Of course, there was no betrayal in the upper circles. Only career and prestigious motives are worse than betrayal, and this was at the top of the empire above the roof.
        1. Egen
          Egen 20 August 2013 06: 43 New
          0
          Quote: Tver
          We had Makarov, he could shoulder the entire Japanese fleet, but ...

          in-in, much more interesting, "what would happen if Makarov had not died" :)
    2. vitek1233
      vitek1233 17 August 2013 13: 28 New
      +1
      if Pavel hadn’t been killed, then it would have been bad for the British
      1. Tver
        Tver 17 August 2013 14: 15 New
        +3
        You do not like the British so much that you are ready to sacrifice Russian soldiers? But Kutuzov believed that Napoleon should be released from Russia. Already broken, he did not pose a threat, and the Germans could let blood for a long time. But the grandson of Peter 3 - Alexander thought differently. It is necessary to help relatives in Europe. For reference: Peter the Third made a shameful peace with Frederick II (his idol) for the sake of the interests of his homeland - Holstein.
    3. Yura
      Yura 17 August 2013 16: 57 New
      0
      Another plus is Tverskoy (Nikita). "Why did the Russians persecute all Europeans in the 18th century, and at 19 they barely coped with the Hanoverians, Saxons and the rest of the trash ??"
    4. Egen
      Egen 20 August 2013 06: 46 New
      0
      Quote: Tver
      Nobody wants to know even their story! Why did Suvorov win in the center of Europe?

      I have always been most interested in another question: what the hell did the Swedes near Poltava? :) Where is Sweden - and where is Poltava! - in fact - Beyond Moscow :) It’s just from history that it’s clear how they got there, but from the point of view of logic, it’s not clear
    5. Prometheus
      Prometheus 20 August 2013 07: 25 New
      0
      Well, the Marines beat them in 2MB, and the REV is a slightly different time. In 1945, the Red Army defeated them in a week.
  15. My address
    My address 17 August 2013 13: 37 New
    +2
    For interest: Napoleon considered his mistake a war with Russia (Polish campaign).

    Now for the interest of lovers of GDP and DAME with the Kudrins: even in times of peace, Napoleon did not keep his gold exchange from Brazen-Saxons (the most beautiful expression of one of the site visitors!). And what about yours?

    And I also consider his most remarkable expression - BIG BATTALS ALWAYS RIGHTS (GOD ON THE PART OF BIG BATTALONS). He respected the author of the expression - Marshal Turenne. But in this expression had in mind something else - not only when there are many, but also when all for one. That would be us.
  16. vitek1233
    vitek1233 17 August 2013 14: 06 New
    +1
    Quote: vitek1233
    Napoleon The great commander, like other great commanders who really wanted to flee to Russia, forgetting about everything

    someone is not nice or not true?
  17. The comment was deleted.
  18. Shadowcat
    Shadowcat 17 August 2013 18: 09 New
    +2
    brr ... The article is nothing more than an attempt to belittle the success of A.V. Suvorov in his famous companies against the French and his great Swiss campaign, as well as the successes of the Russian imperial army under the leadership of M.I. Kutuzov in the Patriotic War.
    Like emperor N. Bonaparte is already exhausted and all that. The French troops marched in battle formations, and did not quietly drag on the Russian Empire due to the fact that all the others had already grabbed and did not fight against N. Bonaparte. If he defeated the Russian Empire he would kiss him in all parts of his body. So do not. There was a great commander-king N. Bonaparte, was beaten by the great commanders of Russia. The enemy was strong, which means that victory over him is glorious. What an honor to beat the Papuans with spears if you have a company of machine gunners?
  19. serioga
    serioga 17 August 2013 19: 30 New
    +2
    Suvorov
    Quote: ShadowCat
    brr ... The article is nothing more than an attempt to belittle the success of A.V. Suvorov in his famous companies against the French and his great Swiss campaign, as well as the successes of the Russian imperial army under the leadership of M.I. Kutuzov in the Patriotic War.
    Like emperor N. Bonaparte is already exhausted and all that. The French troops marched in battle formations, and did not quietly drag on the Russian Empire due to the fact that all the others had already grabbed and did not fight against N. Bonaparte. If he defeated the Russian Empire he would kiss him in all parts of his body. So do not. There was a great commander-king N. Bonaparte, was beaten by the great commanders of Russia. The enemy was strong, which means that victory over him is glorious. What an honor to beat the Papuans with spears if you have a company of machine gunners?
    Suvorov was a brilliant commander, few could combine his talent and respect for a simple soldier, and this was a single fist that crushed everything in its path, even the Turks who equipped the Izmail fortress could not believe for a long time that Izmail fell for such a short time. Glory to the wars and talented commanders of Russia !!!!!
    1. Shadowcat
      Shadowcat 17 August 2013 22: 50 New
      0
      Yes, such commanders and naval commanders as A.V. Suvorov, K.K. Rokossovsky, F.F. Ushakov, N.G. Kuznetsov, N.F. Vatutin and many, many others stand across the throat of many, especially those who encroached on our country, a country in which many nations have united, and to whom it is these outstanding people who stood in the throat with a fatal bone.
  20. Standard Oil
    Standard Oil 17 August 2013 20: 27 New
    +2
    Bonaparte once said: “Of all that I have done in my life, people will remember the battles I have not won, because ultimately the only defeat devalues ​​them all, and my civil code.” Napoleon was not a destroyer, after all, not according to his will he had to constantly fight, and because of the filthy coalition that he constantly broke, but it was restored to the British money as a hydra, right now the fermented patriots will turn shit, but not the French were the first to come to Russia, and the Russian army wailed abroad for the interests of the British, who killed Pavel by the hands of the conspirators, who realized that Napoleon didn’t threaten Russia. Russia and Napoleon’s France could live in peace and harmony, but Alexander 1 couldn’t sit, and the British money was so tempting that the Russian army constantly rushed into the furnace was smashed by Napoleon, the British again gave money and it all started again. A Russian soldier is not a mercenary to fight for other people's interests, absolutely alien and even nasty to Russia itself.
    1. Tver
      Tver 17 August 2013 21: 16 New
      +1
      It was the latter that violated the peace previously established between Alexander and Bonaparte.
      1. Standard Oil
        Standard Oil 17 August 2013 21: 54 New
        0
        Don’t get it wrong, but what should I do with a country that grossly violates its obligations agreed upon by the Tilsit world? Am I all to what Russia got after the victory over Napoleon? Poland? European gendarme? Acquisition of Poland, the worst acquisition of Russia in history, here I am I think everything is clear. The policy of the Gendarme of Europe spilled over into European Russophobia, which eventually spilled out in the Crimean War.
        1. Tver
          Tver 17 August 2013 22: 36 New
          0
          Poland was acquired in about 1770. Of course, this was not the best acquisition, and the policy of Nicholas I was formed after his accession to the throne. And the world did not go out with Napoleon
          1. Standard Oil
            Standard Oil 18 August 2013 20: 54 New
            0
            Perhaps you misunderstood, I meant the Duchy of Warsaw, which, according to the decision of the Vienna Congress, became part of the Russian Empire under the name the Kingdom of Poland, but Nikolai got the geopolitical situation that developed after the Napoleonic Wars, and yes Nikolai couldn’t make a "peace" with Napoleon 3 precisely because of the stupid policies of his poorly speaking Russian predecessor.
            1. Tver
              Tver 18 August 2013 22: 23 New
              +1
              I understood. However, involvement in Polish affairs began earlier when Bonaparte was not born. The performers of military and diplomatic work (Russian officers, for example, A.I. Bibikov) were opposed, but Catherine insisted ... By the way, Napoleon’s flirting with Polish activists began after the defeat of Prussia and was immediately recorded in St. Petersburg
  21. Standard Oil
    Standard Oil 17 August 2013 20: 47 New
    +2
    By the way, didn’t Kutuzov plead with Alexander not to go further to Europe? The wise old man knew perfectly well what the Russian army would fight for in Europe, namely for the interests of the British and Alexander’s ChSV. Of course the British soldier needed the British to defeat Napoleon, because all the rest of Europe were either defeated as Austria or panicky afraid of Napoleon as Friedrich-Wilhelm, who vibrated in his palace at any mention of Napoleon.
    1. Tver
      Tver 17 August 2013 21: 19 New
      -3
      To the psychiatrist! English interests seem to be everywhere ... The foreign campaign of the Russian army was advantageous, primarily to the German states
      1. Standard Oil
        Standard Oil 17 August 2013 21: 42 New
        +1
        I’m sorry for your psychiatrist, you should at least read Tarle chtoli and don’t show ignorance of history. The heart of the coalition was Great Britain, and not the squalid German states weakened by the Rhine Confederation, of course, if you know what it is.
        1. Tver
          Tver 17 August 2013 22: 22 New
          -1
          Is Leipzig an English city? And Danzig - in Scotland ??
          1. Shadowcat
            Shadowcat 17 August 2013 22: 53 New
            0
            If you take that period is Prussia.
            1. Tver
              Tver 18 August 2013 08: 21 New
              -1
              But in Prussia not the Germans live (lived), but the British?
              1. Shadowcat
                Shadowcat 18 August 2013 19: 54 New
                +1
                Ahem, but is it imperative that the British be there so that the country falls into the interest of another country?
                1. Tver
                  Tver 18 August 2013 20: 21 New
                  0
                  Remains of an empty argument about our enemies in the 19th century
  22. Corsair5912
    Corsair5912 17 August 2013 21: 10 New
    +3
    Whatever the sober assessment of Bonaparte’s impact on French society, mass consciousness will remember his “triumphal march” across France in 1815 or his very first steps, including the assault on Toulon in 1793

    No matter how Buonaparte was elevated in the West, for Russians he will forever remain an arrogant invader, murderer, robber, savage, barbarian who burned Moscow, robbed churches and tried to blow up the Kremlin.
    From his Great 600th Army, only 25000 people returned to France.
    1. Tver
      Tver 17 August 2013 21: 25 New
      +3
      Bonaparte left a huge army of idiotic fans. In Russia, it’s SMERDYAKOV ... "a stupid nation defeated smart-s"
    2. Yura
      Yura 17 August 2013 21: 38 New
      +3
      Quote: Corsair5912
      No matter how Buonaparte was elevated in the West, for Russians he will forever remain an arrogant invader, murderer, robber, savage, barbarian who burned Moscow, robbed churches and tried to blow up the Kremlin.
      From his Great 600th Army, only 25000 people returned to France.

      Exactly and nothing else. And what kind of manner we sometimes have, to romanticize aggressors, the enemy is the enemy, even if it will be a Teutonic knight, Napoleon, Hitler, they all came to Russia with one purpose.
  23. tixon444
    tixon444 17 August 2013 21: 42 New
    +2
    Quote: taseka
    A little hooked that cognac "Napoleon" is


    Anecdote:
    Bring a newcomer to a psychiatric clinic. They ask:
    - Last name?
    - Napoleon.
    “Think of something newer, we already have Napoleon.”
    “You have a Napoleon cake, and I brandy.” drinks
  24. 55uaka
    55uaka 18 August 2013 04: 51 New
    -1
    The other day, I accidentally stumbled upon a site for checking fines in the traffic police, and by the way there you can dispute and pay online. For example, for 2 days I challenged 3 fines for a total of about 17 rubles. try it yourself, here is the link to the service - polis.2sms.ru
  25. Gavril
    Gavril 19 August 2013 03: 14 New
    +2
    The larger the territory, the more neighbors and potential threats