I find it more than interesting that every time a discussion of Napoleon's personality, leadership ability, and personal attributes and faults comes up the same comparisons and accusations come with the discussion. The subject of Hitler and sometimes, but not as often, Stalin come into the picture in some form or another, the referral to Napoleon as merely Bonaparte (he is only properly 'Bonaparte' when he was First Consul; previous to that period he is either General Bonaparte or Captain Bonaparte depending on the period in question; after December 1804 he is properly Napoleon as he was a crowned head of state) is used apparently so as to denigrate him as a crowned head of state, which like it or not he was-and unusually for his age he went from First Consul to Emperor of the French with the apparent approval of the French people. We don't refer to the other crowned heads by merely their family name, or perhaps if that is the standard, we should.

The other derogatory comments as to Napoleon's person generally refer to him as being 'corrupt' as well as his whole system, or the French actually relied on a 'pillage system' on campaign when they did not (there being a difference between foraging, requisition, and looting and pillage), as well as assigning other pejoratives to Napoleon such as 'presenting Napoleon as a monster who relished murder, treachery, theft, incest, blasphemy, and any other possible evil.' That is merely propaganda and further it is not historically accurate. And it is usually, if not exclusively, done by those who just don't like the guy for whatever reason and it is doing nothing to contribute to Napoleonic scholarship nor is it presenting an accurate picture of the age.

Anyone here can do as they please, and you're welcome to it, but I just find it odd and recurring that an inaccurate picture of the Emperor has to be constructed and maintained for whatever reason. And the only people who actually say anything about Napoleon being a 'demi-god' are those that continually post this inaccurate information against the man. I haven't seen anyone who actually admires the Emperor and the Grande Armee say that about him and it hasn't been done here, but that is usually the accusation that is levelled at those that do admire the man and what he accomplished.

Generally speaking I have found that the admirers of Napoleon on the forum generally acknowledge his faults and shortcomings and are not uncritical of him. They merely don't try to demonize him and his army or government. Enough of that nonsense has been done already.

Sincerely,
Kevin