Greetings Earthlings-
Hopefully all is going well for you with the summer assignment. For the July 18th check in please discuss the following. THIS CHECK IN IS WORTH ONE QUIZ GRADE AND MUST BE COMPLETE BY MIDNIGHT JULY 19TH:
1. Give a brief synopsis of each book that you are reading. Do you like the books that you have choosen? Why/Why not? Do your books make similar or different arguments regarding Napoleon and his life? Explain.
2. Provide a brief summary of your Plan of Investigation. Be sure to discuss the subject of the investigation. This can be put into question format. Also, discuss the method(s) that will be used to investigate your topic. PLEASE REFER TO THE SAMPLE ESSAY SECTION, ENTITLED: A. PLAN OF INVESTIGATION, FOR THE FORMAT.
3. Discuss any questions or concerns that you may have, AND RESPOND TO ONE OTHER CLASSMATES QUESTIONS/CONCERNS.
IF YOU ARE STILL UNSURE OF WHAT TO DO FOR THE SUMMER ASSIGNMENT, PLEASE REFER TO THE POSTING REGARDING ASSIGNMENT DIRECTIONS AND/OR CONTACT ME WITH YOUR SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.
Best,
Mr. Owens
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
37 comments:
just making sure this works
We should all get our own questia accounts, because you get kicked off when someone else logs in when you're on.
Oh, but you have to pay. Never mind.
So do we have to leave our check in in the form of a comment?
Check In:
1. The two books which i have chosen to read are, Pieter Geyl's "Napoleon For and Against" and "The Corsican: A Diary of Napoleon's Life in His Own Words". The first book I decided to read by Pieter Geyl is basically telling of how many people view Napoleon. The main objective of the book is to give the opinions of many French people that were prominate in Napoleon's time.The author however has a negative view of Napoleon. Even though he does mention those who liked Napoleon, he doesnt often mention the positive attributes of him. I personally am not very fond of this book. I decided to read this book first for i thought it would give me better background information. And since i went into the book having no previous knowledge of the subject, i found myself looking information up online, not only about Napoleon but of the French who Geyl was giving an opinion of. The book has so far not been of any help really for it has seemed to confuse me a little.
"The Corsican" gave me a completely different point of view. The book is set up like a diary, and lists the important dates and years that were significant in his life. But since Napoleon was the one writing his own story, there was no negative words said about Napoleon, and the opinion was left up to the reader. I personally found Napoleon to be very self-absorbed, and full of himself. This book i found more helpful for my plan of investigation, however i am not positive of the accuracy.
2.Plan of Investigation.
For my essay I have decided that i will analyze the impact that Napoleon had on France and Europe, and then compare Napoleon to Hitler. I got this idea from Geyl's book, when in the beginning he himself compared the two very import men in history.
Methods.
In order to analyze the impact that Napoleon had on Franch and Europe i will use the two books i have read to get some information. However i am going to have to do more research online or in the library to gain more knowledge of the subject. Then in order to compare the two, i will need information on Hitler. So i will use previous knowledge and do more research to compare either their tactics or deeds.
3.I am curious as to whether anyone else shares my same view that Napoleon can be compared as similiar to Hitler.
Check In:
1. Synopsis
Napoleon: For and Against by Pieter Geyl gives some French historians’ point of view about Napoleon and his polices. This book gives different points of view on Napoleon and helps to understand that there is more than one way to view Napoleon’s impact. I liked the book because because it contains mainly a French historical point of view; thus, I could compare the views about Napoleon in this book with the British point of view in my other source.
Napoleon by Felix Markham gives a British historian view to Napoleon as a ruler and the policies that Napoleon changed during his reign. The book gives a lot of details about all of Napoleon’s life but it also gives a lot of information about the changes Napoleon made that impacted Europe and France. It also gave me an idea about how Napoleon was different from other rulers at the time and about Napoleon’s personality. I like this book because it gave a British point of view that I could use to compare with my other source.
2. Plan of Investigation
This investigation will try to examine how Napoleon’s power had an impact
on France and Europe. In addressing this question, the discussion focuses on the domestic changes that Napoleon made after he became France’s ruler and how the domestic changes had an impact on France and Europe. The analysis will try to identify how Napoleon influenced the changes, the main changes, and the impact that the changes had on France and Europe through the evaluation of different historian’s views. Two sources, Napoleon: For and Against and Napoleon will be further evaluated.
3. Questions.
Who thinks the defeat in Russia in 1810 was the main reason for his downfall?
And, in response to Katie's question, i do believe that Napoleon is like another Hilter.
1. The books I chose to read for the summer assignment are Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe by F. M. H. Markham and The French Revolution by Linda S. Frey and Marsha L. Frey. Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe focuses on Napoleon’s campaigns through Europe and how his presence and escapades influenced the European countries involved in the campaigns. The first chapter of this book was quite underwhelming and dry. I thought that I would not like the book at all; however I kept reading, and realized that the subject of the book was extremely interesting, even if I didn’t appreciate the author’s style of writing. Now I really enjoy reading this book. The French Revolution basically tells everything about the French Revolution, from the causes of the war to the effects it had on the country’s political and social environments. It also briefly discusses Napoleon’s influence throughout the revolution. I really like the way the authors of this book explain the French Revolution, and I like their style of writing. This book is actually my favorite of the two. I think that both of these books share very similar views of Napoleon. They are both relatively unbiased, but if anything, I think that both books show him as an intelligent, clever man who knew how to be successful in the military and in life.
2. My investigation seeks to discover how Napoleon’s ideas affected the governments of France and the countries his French army conquered. It will focus on his establishment of the Napoleonic Code and the influences it had on Europe. The purpose of the analysis will be to identify in what ways governments in Europe changed after Napoleon’s rule. I will do this by analyzing the opinions and perspectives on the subject of different historians. The sources that I have already started to evaluate, Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe and The French Revolution, will also be further evaluated.
3. I was wondering how broad our paper has to be. Do we have to explain every part of Napoleon’s rise to power, or do we just focus on our specific subject? Or do we have to cover both?
1. The first book I began to read is entitled, Napoleon: For and Against. This book is by Pieter Geyl. This book summarizes the opinions of numerous historians who have all written about Napoleon. These historians are from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. As hinted through the title, this book gives negative and positive outlooks on Napoleon. I thought this would be good selection to read seeing as the assignment tells to get different opinions of Napoleon’s actions. It does not summarize the details of Napoleon’s career. Since I began reading this book first, I found it confusing to follow at first seeing as I did not have background knowledge of Napoleon. However I looked up a brief history of Napoleon online and now it is much easier to follow. I like this book mainly because of the different viewpoints of Napoleon’s doings. It helped me to come up with ideas for my essay topic.
The second novel I selected is England and Napoleon III, a Study of the Rise of a Utopian Dictator. It is written by Franklin Charles Palm. This book focuses on the actions Napoleon took to gain power and how people, in particular the French and the English, reacted to these actions. It also tells the reader what was going on through Napoleon’s head as he rose for power, I chose this book because it told what people thought of Napoleon which I needed to know for my essay. I like this selection because it allows me to learn how the people viewed this man and how he manipulated them through his intelligent ways. It also gives a more historical view than Geyl’s book which was very helpful.
Within each book there are both positive and negative viewpoints of Napoleon which I thought was useful. However they differ in that Geyl’s novel gives the point of views of historians, while Palm’s tells how the people of Napoleon’s time viewed him.
2. The investigation of this essay is to see which of the following countries, France or England, faced greater adversity in their treatment from Napoleon. This investigation will allow the reader to discover about Napoleon’s conquest for control, how he achieved and failed, and how the people in the afore mentioned nations received his rulings. Through analyzing this historical information, it will be discussed which nation received the harsher treatment. The majority of historical evidence used to answer this question can be found in Napoleon: For and Against by Pieter Geyl and England and Napoleon III, a Study of the Rise of a Utopian Dictator by Franklin Charles Palm.
3. One question I have is whether or not we are allowed to use outside sources for our paper besides the 2 books we choose from the website? If you read the sample essay information it says you are allowed as long as the books are your main sources. However our assignment states “using two sources from questia” and therefore I was unsure.
I also have several questions about the format of our papers. One is whether we must use footnotes or citations. In history class we used citations, but the sample essay uses footnotes.
For part B. the summary of evidence, if we were to set it up as a list how would it be formatted? Would it be in bullets? Also would they have to be detailed?
The supporting evidence is basically proof towards answering our question from the plan of investigation correct?
In the packet there are scores given on the pages with the Internal Assessment Criteria. Are these the grades that go along wit the sample essay?
Does the sample essay have a question it is answering and if so can it be provided? It would be easier to understand how to set up our own essay if this was known.
The first source that I found on Questia is titled The History of France, written by John E. Findling. I only used pages 71 through 95, and the section is titled The French Revolution and Napoleon. This section gives the history of France from c. 1770 to c. 1880 and tells of the strife that struck the country among the upper, middle, and lower classes, dealing with the struggling economy, participation in political measures, and Napoleon’s rise to power. The section begins with the French Revolution and the bourgeoisie, and moves to the taking of the Bastille. After the National Assembly had been formed, Findling tells of the “liberal constitutional monarchy,” and the Legislative Assembly having difficulty controlling the general public’s plights. Napoleon is then introduced and we learn of his “recapture of the Mediterranean port of Toulon,” along with his dealing with the revolution, codifying a legal system, and the making of the Bank of France. The section ends with the bourgeoisie standing in the middle, with the nobility and clergy on the right, and revolutionaries on the left. I really enjoyed reading this book, as it showed all of the problems in the social sphere from all different viewpoints, including those of the middle class, lower class, and the nobles. It also shows how the problems were overcome, and how each class dealt with the “resolution.” The second source that I found on Questia is titled The Course of French History, written by Pierre Goubert and Maarten Ultee. Again, I used only a section, titled France Under Napoleon III: 1851-1870; this section starts on page 253 and ends on page 258. This section begins with the rise of Napoleon III and moves quickly to a subsection: A New Economy?, which shows the increasing numbers of economic growth, and how the new economy compared to the old economy. I did not enjoy reading this selection as much as the first source, as the second source was mostly figures and numbers. Both sources, however, shed the same light upon Napoleon. They both describe his rise to power, although they show different perspectives at times.
My plan of investigation includes how Napoleon affected the French economy, and how he dealt with the economy of Europe in general. In other words, How did Napoleon affect the French economy, and how did he affect the European economy to stimulate the French economy? The methods that I will use to investigate this topic will include research from other sources than the two that are listed and comparing the sources to ensure that the information obtained is correct.
The only concern I have is whether or not the sources on Questia will fulfill my needs on the topic. Although there are a broad range of sources on Questia, will some of the sources include Napoleon’s effect on the European economy as a whole? If so, how does it relate to the stimulation of the French economy? Responding to Katie’s post, I do not think that Napoleon can and cannot be compared to Hitler. Although they did both want to take over Europe, I think they did so for different reasons.
1. The two books that I have read are Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe by F. M. H. Markham and Napoleon by Herbert Fisher. Both books are similar in the sense that they trace the events of Napoleon’s life and his rise to power. From the coup d’etat of 18 Brumaire which made Napoleon the First Consul to his eventual exile and death, the major events of France and Europe are covered in great detail. Markham’s book focuses on the broad impact of Napoleon on all of Europe and seems to center around the political consequences of his actions. Fisher on the other hand gives more detail about the military strategy of Napoleon in Italy, Egypt, Syria, and Russia. In addition, Markham takes a more neutral stance on Napoleon whereas Fisher tends to glorify the Frenchman. Markham believes that much of Napoleon’s success was due to circumstance, but Fisher gives credit to Napoleon’s own brilliance. I enjoyed Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe more because it included small personal details of Napoleon’s life such as his time with this little girl while he was in exile. Napoleon seemed to be written more like a textbook and was therefore dull.
2. My plan of investigation will be aimed towards how Napoleon’s political policies shifted as he gained and fought to retain his power in France. The focal point of this topic will be the contradictions and consistencies in Napoleon’s actions throughout his reign as ruler of France. To thoroughly answer this question, I will compare the actions from the beginning and end of Napoleon’s rule and determine the factors that led to such changes. This will include his treatment towards his own people as well as the other nations that he conquered.
3. Questions:
a. Are we restricted to using only the two Questia.com sources that we have chosen?
b. Is there a defined length to this paper (pages, words)?
Reply to Katie: In a way, I do believe that Napoleon and Hitler can be placed in the same category. Both possessed the rhetorical skills to invoke the allegiance of his people. With this power they both planned to gain control of the entire continent of Europe, but they failed.
1.) Synopses.
The first book that I chose was Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe by F.M.H. Markham. Markham’s novel is basically a biography of Napoleon’s life, encompassing all of his major and even some of his minor events as well. Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe ranges from Napoleon’s father’s life before Napoleon was even born to Napoleon’s last effects after his death. However, Markham did have his ways of portraying Napoleon in a certain light throughout the biography. There were an abundance of inferences instances in which Markham presented Napoleon making excuses in effort to justify his actions, or just making excuses in general.
I did enjoy this book because it was more of a detailed explanation of Napoleon’s life, rather than a discussion about a specific aspect of his life. Starting from the very beginning of Napoleon’s life made a lot of his political and military events easier to understand and facilitated in following the development of his personality, which played a significant role in other areas of his life.
My second choice was Napoleon’s Legacy: Problems of Government in Restoration Europe by David Laven and Lucy Riall. This novel is a compilation of writings by different authors to create insightful perspectives and explanations of Napoleon’s long lasting after-effects. The novel especially focuses on the Napoleonic codes and legacy. These two Napoleonic themes became major disputes when deciding what aspects of each to keep or discard, and are well-repeated throughout all the sections of the book, The Apparatus of State, The Legacy of Annexation, and Political Opposition and ‘Social Control’.
This novel did not particularly catch my fancy. I tend to better follow and comprehend books that have a certain flow to them. However, as opposed to a continuous flow, Napoleon’s Legacy: Problems of Government in Restoration Europe contains different opinions and insights by multiple authors. On top of that, even though all the writings per section are related by topic, they are not placed in any set order.
Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe and Napoleon’s Legacy: Problems of Government in Restoration Europe do not make similar arguments about Napoleon and his life. The former is much more explanatory and descriptive as it takes the reader through a crash course of Napoleon’s entire life. On the other hand, the latter is much more critical and analytical due to the fact that there are multiple authors all trying to breakdown a number of ways Napoleon’s codes and legacy impacted the government and restoration of an entire continent.
2.) Plan Of Investigation.
The purpose of this investigation is to analyze how Napoleon impacted the state and society of France and other European nations. The main focus will be on the development of governments and how the nations were directed after Napoleon’s death. The analysis’ purpose is to elucidate the ways in which Napoleon’s long-lasting effects on Europe led to these developments and or changes by means of assessing insights and opinions of various historians. Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe and Napoleon’s Legacy: Problems of Government in Restoration Europe are the two sources that will be assessed most thoroughly.
3.) Questions/Concerns.
Would it be safe to include Napoleon’s expedition to Egypt in the paper even though it isn’t apart of Europe? It would be helpful when it comes to explaining how dedicated he was imperialistically and to Enlightenment ideas and his, but like I said, Egypt isn’t in Europe.
Is it okay to include some information about Napoleon’s contributions to the military in my paper? Some of them were closely tied with the later development of states and societies after his death.
In response to Kathryn’s question, I also believe that Napoleon and Hitler share a number of similarities.
In response to one of Romelie’s questions, on page 4 (The Written Account), under C-Evaluation of Sources, it says “...More than two sources may be evaluated but the emphasis should be on the thorough evaluation of two sources rather than a superficial evaluation of many...” So I am pretty sure you can use other sources, as long as the two books from questia.com are your main focuses.
1. Synopsis
Book I: The French Revolution and Napoleon
Author: Charles Downer Hazen
Henry Holt, 1917
This book gave lots of background on the actual French Revolution, such as what France was like before the Revolution, how it began, and the struggle to find a balance in the political and social system. When I chose this book, I expected the book to describe how Napoleon was involved in the Revolution as it happened. The majority of the book did not intertwine Napoleon and the Revolution, and just focused on Napoleon in the final chapter. Because of this, I did not find the book very helpful. The book, however, did describe the French Revolution in a step-by-step manner that was easy to follow.
Book II: Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe
Author: F. M. H. Markham Fellow
Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe is a book mainly about Napoleon’s involvement in battles throughout Europe during the French Revolution. The book discusses how his involvement affected the battle and various countries in Europe such as Egypt, Italy, and Spain. I enjoyed this book very much, especially the beginning. I felt like Markham Fellow introduced Napoleon’s life extremely well. When he continued to talk about Napoleon’s influence on other countries, he failed to introduce new characters clearly. I found myself wondering who a certain person was, and because he gave so many names, keeping track was extremely difficult.
Because the first book did not give much information about Napoleon’s involvement in the French Revolution, it is not possible for me to compare whether both books have similar opinions regarding his life.
2. Plan of Investigation
This investigation seeks to analyze the impact that Napoleon had on France and Europe during the French Revolution. Did Napoleon provide a positive or negative impact on France and Europe? Did his impact have a large effect on Europe as a whole? The method I will use to investigate my topic will be to analyze some of Napoleon’s actions and decisions that had a future impact on Europe. For example, did the Napoleonic Code impact Europe even after Napoleon was gone?
3. Questions/Answers
To answer Katie’s question, I believe Hitler is similar to Napoleon because they both had a lasting impact on Europe. To compare their personalities might also help you prove that they are similar, and using your book “The Corsican,” gives you strong idea about Napoleon’s personality. Finding a book or more information (such as a diary) about Hitler give you a clear idea about Hitler’s personality, and you can use their own quotes to compare them.
My Own Questions-
a. This is kind of a repetition of Madie’s question, but how much detail do you want us to provide about Napoleon’s life and education before we focus on our specific topic.
b. What kind of format is this paper in? The citations are not based on the bibliography, but there is a footnote at the end of various sentences in the example you gave us. Do we cite specifically the page in book every time we use a source for information?
byee (:
CHECK IN:
1.BOOKS
The books that I chose to read about Napoleon were “Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe” by F. M. H. Markham and “Napoleon” by Herbert Fisher.
In Markham’s book, he gave a detailed description of Napoleon, taking us from his earliest days in Corsica to his final day at St. Helena. Napoleon is portrayed through Markham’s work as diligent. Because of his diligence, Napoleon conquered all. It was not until half way through the book that one could realize that Napoleon was tyrannical. This book, although informative, was not entirely a great selection for beginning research on Napoleon. The identity of Napoleon was new to me, and this book molded my opinion of him into a military officer of great intelligence and determination.
Herbert Fisher portrayed Napoleon in a more factual manner. In “Napoleon”, he did not describe just the glories of his success, for he wrote of his downfalls too. This book described Napoleon not only as brilliant, but also as a usurper. Yet, one thing remained true: Napoleon received what he wanted. What Napoleon wanted was to be better than the historic heroes he had read and heard about. He achieved his goals, mostly with his intelligence not persistency. Fisher describes Napoleon in theory as a clever and witted man, and showed him gaining his glory rather than it being handed it. This book, however time consuming it may be, is more accurate than Markham's. Fisher entailed more facts and evidence in his book than Markham did, and this book seemed clear up my misconception of Napoleon.
2.PLAN OF INVESTIGATION
The purpose of this investigation is to show how Napoleon impacted France, England, and other European countries. This investigation will focus on France’s relationship with England, and how Napoleon’s policies affected this relationship. Napoleon ended all commerce with England during his rule. But why was Napoleon so Anti-British? How did France’s relationship with England undergo many changes in the Napoleonic time, and how was England affected by Napoleon? The methods of research I will use will be the two sources I have begun evaluating, and making sure the information is accurately noted. I will seek out opinions of the English on Napoleon, in hopes to find an answer to my question.
3.QUESTIONS
Is the plan of investigation we provide at check in going to be definite for all further research? Are we able to change/edit it in the time span left for this project?
In response to Katie’s question, I do believe Hitler and Napoleon can be compared. Although they were trying to seize control of Europe for different reasons, they were still ambitious to have control.
In response to Raymond’s question of length, if you go to page 2 of History Summer Assignment packet, it says below Internal Assessment that “…one’s own research, evaluation of sources, and conclusions will be approximately 1500-2000 words in length (roughly seven pages)…”
1. Synopses and Opinions:
Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe by F.M.H. Markham Fellow
Napoleon Bonaparte was a product of the French Revolution, in that, even though he was born poor, he was able to rise to great power. After proving his brilliance and strength of character in the French military, he gained power and was crowned emperor of France. He made various reforms to the French government and was obsessed with maintaining his grand empire across Europe. But soon, countries began adopting the principles of the nationalist movement and resisting Napoleonic domination. A disastrous battle with Russia led to the fall of the empire and to Napoleon’s forced retirement.
The French Revolution and Napoleon by Charles Downer Hazen
The French Revolution overthrew the old monarch and ended up with a Reign of Terror, during which anyone who was at all suspected of opposing the new republic was sent to the guillotine and killed. During this chaotic time, France was at war with a number of European nations, and the brave young officer Napoleon Bonaparte came into the picture. He was sent on a campaign to Italy which was tremendously successful, and he became a national hero. After this, Bonaparte gained power and eventually developed an empire, along with which came ten years of continuous war. Ultimately, European countries started to resist Bonaparte, and the empire, and the power of Bonaparte himself, collapsed.
I liked the first book (Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe) because I enjoyed the insights that the author lent into the actual character and personality of Napoleon. I didn’t like the second book (The French Revolution and Napoleon) as much because I didn’t really agree with the way that the author portrayed Napoleon himself. However, I did like how this book really explained in detail how the government and history of France were changed by both the Revolution and Napoleon.
The two authors had different opinions of Napoleon. F.M.H. Markham Fellow, the author of Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe, was aware of Napoleon’s power-hungry attributes, but the reader could definitely see his fascination with Napoleon, because he emphasized his brilliance and other good characteristics very often. Charles Downer Hazen, author of The French Revolution and Napoleon, viewed Napoleon in basically the opposite way; he did acknowledge that Napoleon was a brilliant man, but he mainly emphasized that he was greedy and would do anything for more power. Also, the two authors contrastingly portrayed the war tactics of Napoleon. When Napoleon made a mistake in war, Fellow seemed to be thoroughly disappointed in him for not realizing what was happening. Fellow also emphasized very much Napoleon’s brilliance in coming up with plans for battle, even though they may have ended up in defeat. In cases such as this, Hazen stressed the blunders that Napoleon made. One last difference that I noticed was in how the two authors described the French Revolution. Hazen, the American author, made a few references to the American Revolution when explaining it, while Fellow, the English author, never did. However, Hazen spent much more time on the Revolution, since it was one of two subjects of his book, than Fellow did; perhaps Fellow would have referred to the American Revolution as well if he had spent half of his book on the Revolution.
2. Plan of Investigation:
The French Revolution sought to abolish the monarchy and reform the French government to bring about equality, liberty, and freedom for everyone in France. Napoleon then came into power and proceeded to change the government, but not in exactly the ways that the Revolutionaries had wanted. This investigation will seek to answer how Napoleon changed the French government in regards to the reforms that the Revolutionaries had hoped to make, concerning such topics as religion, women’s rights, freedoms and censorship, and education. To do so, the investigation will analyze sources from the point of view of two different authors. Two sources that are being used are Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe by F.M.H. Markham Fellow and The French Revolution and Napoleon by Charles Downer Hazen.
3. Questions and Responses:
I have a question regarding the subject of our investigations. Do we have to cover Napoleon’s impacts on both France and Europe, or can we just focus on France? I had also been wondering, like Romelie, if we would be allowed to use more than these two sources to complete the project, but Delande already answered that. In response to Katie’s comparison between Hitler and Napoleon, I can see where she is coming from but Napoleon didn’t really strike me as evil. Also, I agree with Courtney that Napoleon’s empire really collapsed after he was defeated in Russia. When Austria went over to the side of the allies during the armistice of that war, it showed how many European countries had turned against Napoleon and begun to resist his empire.
I agree with what Adrya said: "When he continued to talk about Napoleon’s influence on other countries, he failed to introduce new characters clearly. I found myself wondering who a certain person was, and because he gave so many names, keeping track was extremely difficult."
I found, in both books that I read, that some degree of prior knowledge was needed to fully understand the books, so that made it harder to read them.
Check in-
Synopsis
The books I selected to begin research with were Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe and Napoleon For and Against, written by F.M.H Markham and Pieter Geyl respectively. The former emphasized his ingenious military strategies and political maneuvers which enabled him to accumulate tremendous power through the utilization of his intellect and the fierce training he received at Brienne. Furthermore, this book reveals key qualities about the emperor such as his,so-called, self-absorbed nature and his supposed omniscience. I actually found this book to be entertaining, because his keen strategies and skill in mathematics were the source of his acceptance in such societies as the "institute of science", a band of prestigious scientists and archaeologists which accompanied him on the coup'd'etat of Egypt.
Unlike the former, Napoleon For and Against, focused on the people's opinions of Napoleon, in contrast, to studying the tactics he employed to battle. However, the books merit in relationship to my assignment is high, because it will allow to understand various views of Napoleon. And so, I found this book to be semi-entertaining, because it interesting to learn how others, holding different status, would view him.
2. Plan of Investigation
For this investigation, I will be researching Napoleon's impact on France and Europe. To fully understand the situation, I must study not only his military actions but the policies he enforced as Emperor. Furthermore, it was once believed that Napoleon was a all-knowing and omnipotent,although recently it has been disapproved, I will seek to prove whether he truly was as extraordinary as once thought. To go about this, however, I will need to use more sources, which will require using both the internet and library resources.
3. I have two questions for the class. The first being if anyone believes that Napoleon truly was all knowing, and the second being if his conceit was well-earned and a primary force in his career.
To answer Ray's question, the paper is supposed to be 1500-2000 words long.
=]
In response to Deogenes's comment:
Obviously, Napoleon wasn't omniscient or he wouldn't have lost all of his power. But I do think he was conceited, he had a reason. =P But seriously, when you're that smart and powerful, you probably can't help but think that you're amazing.
my Check In info:
SINOPSIS
On the French Revolution: " new outlook on life, a new faith... inspiring them with intense enthusiasum."(pg.55) said by Charles Downer Hazen author of the first book I have read titled The French Revolution and Napoleon. In his novel, Hazen introduces the idea that The French Revolution was a magnificent idea that needed to happen to France and Europe to deal with the financial sitations of the last 10-15 years, expose the people to a different fedual system making them all into equals much like America did in 1776, and exterminate the ruler Louis XVI who attempted to listen to the people, miserably failed to do so, resulting in his and his wife Marie Antoinette's untimely death. Out of that turmoil a rose a witness on that day named, Napoleon Bonaparte who knew that there had to be change. Napoleon becoame the next leader after the Revolution leading a dictatorship, however the people knew he was fighting for them. napoleon gave the people a new sense of hope by changing the wrongs the past leaders made and making them right. He gave the people back their land if the purchased it and limited taxation by how much you made. However, the country began to struggle once again
financially.The only plan Napoleon had was to conquest new territories to help his beloved country. Conquest upon conquest it seemed Napoleon had his role as a leader under control. He was rumored to be a murderer, conspirator, and almost murdered himself on a few occassions his people remained forever faithful to him. Grateful, to his people he allowed them equality but not liberty. Soon, the people began to realize that their beloved leader was turning into one of the royals and stepping on the people that he thought stood in his way. For example, murdering the Duke d'Enghien, the Prince of Condé who was said to be an innocent. The people though still supported him because he gave them a new constitution in 1804. Napoleon strengthened France extending its territories over the northern coasts making France stronger than it has ever been but even the great ruler could not forsee that within a few years time the empire would crumble beneath his feet. Napoleon started as a good man in the beginning but allowed his ego to get the better of him and began to rule his empire by fear and not by the principles he started with. Napoloean should have known the people wouldn't be ruled by limiting restrictions ever again. Thus, his empire fell.Honestly, I enjoyed reading this book because the opening of it grabbed my attention right away and the ending is very memorable and the last line clearly sticks in my head "Europeans will not be ruled by simply one nation". Hazen's view is a sort of positive view on the French Revolution but a back and forth approval/ disapproval of Napoleon himself.
The second book I have chosen to read is Napoleon: For and Aganist by Pieter Geyl. I haven't fully finished the book but my understanding of it is not only Geyl's perspective of Napoleon but french historians. Its very refreshing to see history accounted for by such a great author like Geyl because he gives you the full story from others points of view not just his. Although he wasn't fond of Napoleon others were and he took account of that in his novel. I think that this book had a great opening but I notice myself as I'm reading wondering about miscellanous things and not really focusing on the story at hand.
This book isn't really as interesting as The French Revolution adn Napoleon.
Plan Of investigation:
My investigation will be the impact that Napoleon had on France and Europe. My main discussion will foucuse on if Napoleon wanted to make his country the strongest and most powerful it had ever been or did he just want to conquerand rule all. My methods will be comparing the views of the people that he actually ruled (the french) to the historians who have their own point of view but also the idea of how Napoleon got where he was. I'm not only going to use the two books that I have read but also journal entries and more information on Napoleon's ruling. My analysis seeks to answer if Napoleon's impact truly benefit France or did hurt France and Europe. Two sources are: The French Revolution and Napoleon by Charles Downer Hazen adn Napoleon: For and Against by Pieter Geyl.
Questions?
DO you all think that Napoleon was an evil dictator or do you think he had good intentions for what he did. In response to Kathyrn's question I do think that hitler and napoleon can be compared.
Ok so this is actually Rose's check in because her internet isn't working so I'm posting it for her =)
1. Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe is the first book I’m reading. This book discusses significant dates and events throughout Napoeleon’s rein. F.M.H. Markham describes the highlights and lowlights of Napoleon’s career; starting with a brief overview of his education and ending with his imprisonment in Waterloo. I thought it would be a good book to read because it would include a summary of Napoleon and explain how Europe was affected by his rule. I enjoyed this book because it chronologically portrays Napoleon’s life. Starting with a small amount of prior knowledge on Napoleon I found this book helpful and an excellent book to begin my future studies of his achievements. I like this book because of the easy to follow context that will help me describe key points in my essay.
The second book I read was The French Revolution and Napoleon in which Charles Downer Hazen describes the attempts towards the perfect society. It goes in depth describing various successes failures faced while building an empire that Napoleon would rule. It also clarifies the time period these events took place by mentioning details of The French Revolution. I enjoyed this book because it touched upon a subject I had knowledge on from my past school years, The French Revolution, and then talked about a subject new to me, Napoleon, and how they corresponded together. I liked this book and found it helpful because it reinforced the reason for Napoleon’s decline, which was a major help in developing ideas for my essay.
2. This investigation requests to answer how Napoleon’s decline affected European countries other then France. When answering this question, the discussion first centers in on describtions of Napoleon’s rule and concludes with Napoleon’s defeat at Waterloo. The investigation continues to explain how Napoleon’s defeat would affect the lifestyles of the European people in the countries previously under his power. Details of his rule and the outcomes of his actions are described chronologically by two different veiwpoints of historians. Two sources, Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe and The French Revolution and Napoleon are further examined. I’m not exactly sure how the plan of investigation is supposed to be set up. I tried to follow the example, but it seems I copied too much and I’m nervous it would be considered plagiarism. Therefore I’ll describe my ideas in my own words. The question I’ll be addressing is “how Napleon’s decline affected European countries other then France.” I’m interested in the after math of Napoleon and how it affected the bordering countries. When reading the two books I took most interst in Napoleon’s defeat at Waterloo, so I would like to expand on that subject and center on that.
3. I don’t have any concerns with the topic I’m researching; my only concern includes the length of this paper. Roughly seven pages seems to be a lot for drawing your own conclusions and developing your opinions. I’m also not sure if we’re allowed to use the word “I” or write in first person. I’ll need your guidance with the specifics of this paper. I try to follow the sample essay but I’m not sure what the question is and I think my peers are confused with that as well. If the question was known it may be easier to understand.
Check in:
1.Synopsis: The first book that I chose to read was "The French Revolution and Napoleon" by Charles Downer Hazen.In this book the author discusses the governmental status of Europe and how Napoloeon affected the french revolution.In the beginning,the author explains basically what made the revolution begin and highlights the processs of the empire's victory. The author also focuses on Napoleon's fall only at the end.I liked this book because it gave me background information on the french revolution but it could've had more on Napoleon.The second book that I chose to read was "The Corsican: A Diary of Napoleon's Life in His Own Words" this was a kind of diary/journal that was actually written by Napoleon himself. I like this book because Napoleon portrays his actions as the best and shows that he was a confident leader and he kind of allows the reader to be the judge and decide what their opinion is on his reign over the empire. However while reading this I had to keep in mind that this was only in his point of view which may not provide accurate information.I liked this source because I got to learn about Napoleon and what he thought of himself...One question that this source left me with was: how did he fail if he was so confident?
2.Plan of Investigation:
This investigation seeks to discuss how Napoleon impacted France and Europe.And this investigation focuses on revealing all the things that may have helped or caused Napoleon to become a failure and where it all began. The investigation will also try to figure what inspired Napoleon to try to become dominant and control the empire as he attempted.Two sources: "The French Revoltion and Napoleon" by Charles Downer Hazen, "The Corsican: A Diary of Napoleon's Life in His Own Words" by M. Johnston and Houghton Mifflin.
3. Can we use more sources (because the first book I read gave me a solid foundation on the french revoltion but I still need more information on Napoleon's life,like some sort of biography on Napoleon).....And can we change our plan if something else comes up or if you can find enogh information?
To answer Katie's question...I alsio think that Hitler and Napoleon definately have many similarities and I like your topic....its really interesting=)
Book 1: Strategy, by B.H. Liddell Hart.
A basic overview of military strategy throughout history, starting in Ancient Greece and ending with WWII. This book focuses on the authors idea of “indirect strategy.” This idea dictates that the great victors through history did so not through direct confrontation with their enemies, but by wearing them down through numerous means, whether avoiding combat until the odds were in their favor, or by attacking the countryside in a campaign to wreck the enemy’s economy. In Chapter 8, titled ‘The French Revolution and Napoleon Bonaparte,” Hart analyzes how Napoleon managed to use indirect strategy to defeat his many opponents through his campaigns in Europe. “Strategy” goes into depth on the state of the pre-Napoleon French Army and the ways in which he led them, touching upon the strategies he used, such as the dispersion of force technique, as well as a reversion to “living off the land.” Strategy also analyzes the military theorists whom Napoleon modeled his doctrine after, pointing out how their praise for mobility and dispersion led to Napoleon’s creation of self-contained divisions.
Book 2: "Napoleon's Integration of Europe," by Stuart Woolf.
This book analyzes how Napoleon managed to conquer most of europe in many aspects, not just militarily. It remarks how some of his motivation came from the weak governments of his targets, and how their nation-states were wobbling in the midst of internal crises. It also discusses the means by which Napoleon made these conquests possible, describing the administrative problems he faced, including conscription, transportation, and supply.
Plan of Investigation
This investigation seeks to answer how Napoleon changed military doctrine and strategy in 19th century Europe. In addressing this question, the discussion will focus on how Napoleon won his campaigns in Italy, Spain, and other locales through the introduction of strategies not used for centuries in europe. This analysis seeks to find out what impact Napoleon had on French and Europeon military doctrine and strategy, through the examination of his victories and defeats.
My question is if anyone else thinks that his conquests had an effect on the rise in military alliances and buildup in Europe throughout the rest of that century, leading up to WWI and WWII.
My answer is to Tommara: Yes, I do believe Napoleon wasn't as evil as some would believe. While I do find that he was motivated by a greed for power and glory, I feel that some of that motivation was to extend the power of the French empire, to make the French the greatest people in Europe (its not like he ordered the construction of monuments to himself). So, evil no. Dictator, yes, though, as he sent thousands of frenchmen to their death in his campaigns to do nothing more than "extend the power of the French empire." There was definitely no Congress to block him on that one.
1. The first book I chose to read is Napoleon in Review by George Gordon Andrews. This book provided me with some background information on Napoleon, which was helpful before actually getting into a book more about his influence on France and other European countries. This book also provides information about the French Revolution. I found Napoleon in Review a little boring at times, but I found that one chapter of the book was quite interesting. I really enjoyed the section about Napoleon's plans and ambitions. It discussed not only his plans and ambitions involved with the military, but also how he wanted to write a book about the history of the island he was born on, Corsica. However, Napoleon was never able to finish this piece. The author does not seem to have any positive or negative opinion about Napoleon, but does include quotations from some European histories who view Napoleon in a favorable way. The other book I have chosen is Napoleon's Integration of Europe by Stuart Woolf. This book is about how Napoleon conquered many European countries. Many of the countries that he conquered were very weak even before Napoleon moved in with his armies. The book talks specifically about 2 "practices of conquest" Napoleon used: administrative integration and exploitation. I have not read this book entirely , but I think that the information included in it will be very helpful in the development of my investigation. The 2 books I have chosen are very different, since my first book mainly provides background information on Napoleon and the second book is about how Napoleon conquered other European countries.
2. Plan of Investigation
This investigation will try to answer the question, How did Napoleon impact France and other European countries? More specifically, this investigation will focus on how the conquering of countries throughout Europe affected France's and other European countries governments and civilians. Napoleon in Review and Napoleon's Integration of Europe will be further evaluated along with the analysis of some important Europeans' opinions and beliefs to answer this question.
3. In response to Tommara, I don't entirely think that Napoleon was evil for what he did. I don't really agree with his choices, but I think Napoleon had his own reasons for conquering so many countries. In response to Katie, I think Napoleon and Hitler were similar to each other, but I think that Hitler was a lot worse than Napoleon in the sense that he ordered so many people to be killed. My question is the same as Adrya's: how do you want the citations in our paper? Also, are we supposed to only focus on a specific type of impact or do you want us to include other information about Napoleon?
1) Synopses
A) One of the sources I will be using to guide me in my investigation of the connection between the French Revolution and Napoleon is titled The French Revolution and Napoleon: A Sourcebook written by Philip G. Dwyer. This book provides a detailed description of the steps and procedures Napoleon used to gain control of the French government. Although he earns his prominence as a general, Napoleon fought many battles to gain control of Europe and eventually become the ruler of France. Yet many obstacles stood in his way including a failed attempt to invade Russia in 1812 as well as his defeat at Waterloo. Despite his setbacks and downfalls, Napoleon spent his life trying to regain control and earning a permanent name in the history of France.
a) I do not find this book particularly entertaining because of the way it is set up. While the chronological order makes it easier to understand and place events in my head, the format and style of writing, or should I say lack of, makes it hard to comprehend and remember. During the reading process of this book, I often discover myself reading the same page over and over, surrounded by facts and more facts, only to find myself already zoned out and bored to an extreme. Despite the hurdles that I faced in my continuous attempts to read, I plowed on through just as Napoleon overcame his obstacles in his fight for power.
B) The second book that I chose to use in my search of the full impact Napoleon made on France and Europe was Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe by F. M. H. Markham. This source offered insight to Napoleon's life as a young boy and supplied possible reasons as to why Napoleon took the actions he did. While restating the same facts, this resource also described and explained how Europe, as a whole, was affected by Napoleon's campaigns across the continent. Other important details in Napoleon's reign over France were not overlooked, including the views of others towards him and how he grew to be a legend regardless of his eventual defeat.
b) While restating many of the same facts as the previous source, I found this one to be much more fulfilling as it did not only provided me with facts, facts, and more facts, but gave me an opportunity to form my own ideas and use my skills to investigate and make my own decision as to who Napoleon truly is.
C) Both sources gave me similar arguments regarding Napoleon and his life as they both used the viewpoint of an outsider, using basic facts to provide the reader knowledge, while avoiding making too many conclusions for the audience. However Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe delivered a much better performance with its expansion on the subject and the many details that the other account ignored. Despite what I stated, I find the tedious and monotonous fact-filled The French Revolution and Napoleon: A Sourcebook to be a more reliable resource for my investigation. Using those facts as evidence, I will be able to support my conclusions thoroughly and clearly.
2) Plan of the Investigation
A) This investigation will take a closer look at how society viewed Napoleon's campaigns for control during the French Revolution. To gain more knowledge of Napoleon and how the citizens of Europe were impacted, studies will be separated by social status. In the process of finding the answers, the focus will be on the support and opposition Napoleon possessed for his conquers throughout his life. Furthermore, this analysis of other figures in Napoleon's life as a ruler will be developed to explain how he managed to begin as a general of the French Revolution to become the Ruler of the French. The French Revolution and Napoleon: A Sourcebook and Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe will be used to further the study of the other characters in the story of Napoleon's life.
3) Questions/Concerns
A) In the packet when you were explaining the summer assignment, you also mentioned the internal assessment and how this summer assignment is an introduction to this type of writing. Does that mean the requirements such as the approximate length of 1500-2000 for the actual internal assessment is not considered for the summer assignment?
B) Can we use online resources as we further develop our papers? I noticed that although in the "Plan of Investigation" of the sample essay, only two sources were mentioned yet in the final bibliography, many more book sources were stated.
C) Should we include sources we examined but did not directly include in the final paper in our bibliography?
D) When you mentioned the internal assessment in the packet, you said that we will spend about 20 hours inside AND outside the class. Are any of the investigation we will be doing in the class interactive?
4) Answering Questions
(I am not sure which ones are already answered because I don't feel like reading through everyone's check-ins.)
A) In response to Romelie's uncertainty over writing in first person in the analysis and conclusion, I am sure that it is not allowed. Therefore words such as "I" and "our" and "you" are prohibited.
B) In response to Carla's question, we can use more than those sources as long as we focus on certain sources rather than using too many sources without a central point.
C) I also find Katie's topic of Hitler and Napoleon interesting although I can imagine that she will be spending many hours also studying Hitler and his motives to compare with Napoleon. Good luck on that!
D) After many people questioned whether we can change the plan, it also made me wonder the same thing. However I am thinking that since it IS just a PLAN, we shouldn't need to change it and could just include more information in the actual writing assignment.
E) Someone asked how Napoleon failed if he was so confident. That question made me think how sometimes having too much confidence is what makes people fail. Since Napoleon possessed so much confidence, he tended to look at the bigger picture and overlooked the small details.
F) In response to Madie's question, after reading the sample essay, I think that we only need to focus on our specific subject. However when making conclusions and opinionated statements, we will need to use evidence and background information to support them. So in a way, the books provide us with prior knowledge of his life and his journey to power to use as evidence.
CHECK IN-
1)Synopsis & Opinions::
The first book I choose was England and Napoleon III: A Study of the Rise of a Utopian Dictator by Franklin Charles Palm. This book was more about how the things Napoleon chose to do affected the French and other European countries, especially England. It also tells the reader what was going through Napoleon's head as he was rising to dictatorship. It shows how he manipulated people in various ways, assuring them the whole time he had no intentions of a dictatorship. However, it also shows another side, making him look like not such a bad person. Although he wanted complete control and that's what he got, this book made it seem like he wanted to better France and the downfall was not all his fault.
The second book I choose was Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe by F. M. H. Markham. This book was very specific as to the battles and conflicts Napoleon faced in Europe. It also provided a good amount of background information, which made it helpful for me to understand how he rose to power and how he was involved even when he was a young man. Especially never previously studying about Napoleon, I liked that the author didn’t just start about how Napoleon conquered France, but how he got there beforehand. Overall, it gave me a good understanding of Napoleon’s reign and the decisions he made to take over France.
Out of the two books I read, I liked England and Napoleon: A Study of the Rise of a Utopian Dictator more because the author included how France and England were involved and how they felt about Napoleon while this all was happening. Also, this book showed how Napoleon didn’t just come in and take over, he worked his way up to a dictatorship and gaining total control. Napoleon even made good changes when he was in charge, so that the French and other countries would not be suspicious of his intentions. My books do not make different arguments about Napoleon and his life; however, each book focuses on a different aspect of him. One book was general about the events and included much of the background, while another was more in depth and focused more on the impact he had on the French and the other countries.
2)Plan of Investigation::
This investigation seeks to discover mainly how Napoleon impacted France and Europe as a whole. Also, to discover whether it was France or England who dealt with more of Napoleon’s bad decisions throughout his reign. Furthermore, how Napoleon influenced the changes and the impact that the changes had on France and Europe. I will complete this investigation by analyzing the opinions and perspectives on the subject of different historians. The sources that I have already started to evaluate, England and Napoleon III: A Study of the Rise of a Utopian Dictator and Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe, will be further examined.
3)Questions::
Do we have to set up our paper with any specific requirements, or a certain format? (like quotes and how much supporting evidence we need)
Also, if i find a different point I would like to prove after this check-in, can i change it?
Where do we include our own opinions about Napoleon? Is it throughout the paper or in the analysis?
In response to Courtney’s question, I think that a number of things lead to Napoleon’s downfall, but the defeat in Russia was the final and major event that ended his reign.
1. The first book I've chosen to read is "Napoleon's Satellite Kingdoms" by Owen Connelly. In this historical analysis of the Napoleonic Empire, I like how Connelly focuses on specific regions of the kingdom rather than the French territory as a whole. He describes the differences between the spreading French empire and the existing states. Then he notes the changes in lifestyles and policies for both sides in a great example of cultural exchange and integration.
The second book I read was "Napoleon's Integration of Europe" by Stuart Woolf. In this account, the author attempts to cover many of the satellite kingdoms and the effects of Napoleon on them. However, one thing I do not like about this book is the author's negligence of some key information from areas such as Russia due to his inability to read sources from these places. This could have been solved if he had had associates translate the text for him, giving the book a more in-depth understanding of the area's reaction to French occupation. Besides this, the book is likeable and an easy read, providing a lot of information about the French occupation and changes in Europe.
2. Plan of Investigation
The Objective of the plan of investigation is to analyze the impact of Napoleon on France and Europe. My specific question under this broad scope of material is to investigate what region of the Napoleonic empire was most affected by French occupation and what affects these changes had on subsequent life in that country. It has been noted that the changes during this period occurred on both sides as a result of cultural assimilation. Therefore, another focus of my investigation will be the changes made to the French empire as well as the occupied kingdoms.
The two books I am reading, "Napoleon's Satellite Kingdoms" by Owen Connelly and "Napoleon's Integration of Europe" by Stuart Woolf" focus on this topic very well an will provide much of the base information needed for my investigation. However, I will still need specific information from elsewhere depicting some more specific adaptations of both sides (French and occupied) during the Napoleonic Era.
3. Questions
Does the paper's format include large paragraphs in separate sections or a change every time we switch minor topics?
What part of the kingdom (outside of France) do people beleve was most strongly affected by Napoleon?
To answer Deogenes questions, I do not believe that Napoleon was all knowing becuase that is a feat nothing short of a God, which he certainly was not. Furthermore, his vanity may have given him confidence in his endeavors of conquest and thus positively affected his career. He had a right to be full of himself after nearly completely conquering Europe. However, his vanity also helped destroy him because he was so sure of himself that he felt he was capable of nearly anything.
Synopsis
The first book I read was Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe by F. M. H. Markham Fellow. The author starts off talking about Napoleon’s parents, his personality, and him starting a life in the navy after his father’s death. The book is basically a biography of Napoleon’s life detailing his war tactics from the French Revolution to his death. I enjoyed this book because it included every detail about Napoleon’s life and it even includes a bit of Carlo Bonaparte’s life as well.
The second book is England and Napoleon III – A Study of the Rise of a Utopian Dictator written by Franklin Charles Palm. The book starts off talking about Napoleon's uncle. The book is mainly about how Napoleon affected others in his time, and how they responded to his actions. For example, Czar Nicholas I, Alexander I, and Baroche all tried to overthrow Napoleon's power. I thought this book was rather boring especially in the beginning where the author only talked about Napoleon's uncle.
Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe is more about the thoughts and actions of Napoleon while England and Napoleon III- A Study of the Rise of a Utopian Dictator is mainly about how others react to Napoleon's actions.
2. Plan of the Investigation - The main focus will be how Napoleon’s thoughts and actions have changed starting from his gaining of power and respect to him becoming lieutenant and ultimately a historical figure. It will also include how Napoleon’s actions have affected his followers and the people in France and Europe, thus changing their viewpoints about his character.
3. Questions
Is it alright if there are changes in the plan of the investigation after checking in?
I agree with Ally:
"I found, in both books that I read, that some degree of prior knowledge was needed to fully understand the books, so that made it harder to read them."
These books should be providing us with that "prior knowledge", not expecting us to have that knowledge already, especially since some of us are not remotely interested in that topic and have never bothered to read up on Napoleon on their own, therefore giving us no prior knowledge and as a result expecting the books to answer the questions instead of confusing us.
1. The first book I chose called Napoleon in Review by George Gordon Andrews details Napoleon’s life and implies how his personal life and his traits affected his role as an emperor and a military man. The book summarizes Napoleon’s life and constantly glorifies him as an amazing and powerful person. The second book I chose called Napoleon’s Integration of Europe by Stuart Woolf details Napoleon’s integration of Europe and the impact it had on the people of France. It also summarizes Napoleon’s conquest of Europe and the various modifications he made for his empire so it would remain stable. Napoleon in Review makes the argument that Napoleon was a great and powerful man. Whereas, Napoleon’s Integration of Europe is mostly indifferent on its views of Napoleon himself.
2. This investigation seeks to answer what impact Napoleon had on France and Europe. To address this question, the discussion focuses on how Napoleon’s integration of Europe impacted the people of France and Europe and how certain qualities of Napoleon impacted France and Europe. In analyzing this question, the assessment will try to identify Napoleon’s qualities impacted France and Europe. Two sources, Napoleon’s integration of Europe and Napoleon in Review are further evaluated.
3. I can not think of any questions I might have now.
To answer Deogenes’s question: I do not think Napoleon could have truly been all knowing, very smart, but not all knowing.
To answer Tommara’s question: I do not think that Napoleon was an evil dictator and I’m sure he had good intentions for his country just misunderstood.
Check In
1. Books
The first book I chose was "Napoleon For and Against" by Pieter Geyl. This book was basically about several French historians from different times and eras and their point of views on Napoleon. I chose this book because of its title. I assumed that the book was going to be about several different perspectives on Napoleon and that is for the most part what it is all about. The second book that I chose to read was "The French Revolution and Napoleon" by Charles Downer Hazen. This book practically drew out step by step everything that happened and that led up to the Revolution. It also focuses on the downfall of Napoleon. Personally I like both novels and find them to be very intuitive about the situation.
2. Plan of the Investigation
The goal of this investigation is to figure out how big of an impact did Napoleon really have on Europe...let alone France. This investigation will also focus on the several changes that Napoleon made while he was reigning and whether or not those changes had to do with his overall downfall and failure. Not only that, this investigation will try to figure out at which point of his reign did his downfall start and whether or not it was an immediate downfall after that change or a gradual downfall that happened over time slowly.
3. Questions
I don't exactly know whether or not somebdy already asked this question but here it goes: Can we use other resources other than just books? (i.e. journal entries, etc...)
Here's what I have to say about my progress on my report (I apologize for the lengthy delay...)
1. My first book, titled "The French Revolution and Napoleon: A Sourcebook", published in 2002, is a lengthy and chronologically arranged collection of primary sources, which are documents, memoirs and letters written by those who were the unwilling participants in the French Revolution and the events that followed. Added to these are brief descriptions by the book's author of the context behind each primary source. I liked reading this one because it was comprehensible; I could virtually always tell who was speaking, and when the papers were written; the chapters flowed smoothly due to their neat arrangements, and I could understand that all these documents, when put together, had a long story to tell.
However, the other book I had chosen, titled "Royalist Political Thought During the French Revolution", published in 1995, was a bore-fest. It was basically like a series of essays written by one person about various French Royalists' opinions about how the French Revolution had started, who caused it, and what they should have done about it. The opinions of most of the royalists weren't all that different, and it became redundant by the time I reached the third or fourth of eight chapters. However, this book does have a redeeming quality: the last chapter basically summarizes all the rest of them, and in retrospect, if I had known better, I should have just read that chapter.
As far as each book's opinions on Napoleon are concerned, well, I'd have to say neither book really spoke for itself. However, I can say that the first book, though it presented several different opinions, could be trying to say that Napoleon was a failure, and supported this idea by cataloguing several documents about Napoleon's failed policies and political gambles. Also, the second book, though it only provides a foresight perspective on Napoleon's reign, it shows that royalists despised and feared the emperor from the beginning.
2. As I have been assigned, my investigation attempts to explain what effects the French Revolution and Napoleon each had on France and the rest of Europe. The investigation will attempt to demonsrate what circumstances allowed the French Revolution to occur, how Napoleon was able to easily usurp the vacant French leadership position, and how Napoleon's hubris lost him his power. Evidence will be extracted from the two sources mentioned above: "The French Revolution and Napoleon: A Sourcebook", and "Royalist Political Thought During the French Revolution".
3. In response to my classmate Kathryn, I would have to say that it wouldn't be a very inaccurate statement that Napoleon was self-absorbed, because that's probably one reason why he had to abdicate and why he failed to regain his power in 1815.
Now I have a question: How often are we going to have to take notes in this class? Also, how much do I have to focus on Napoleon in particular? That is all.
I'm a little confused on how to use this and don't know where to post so I guess I will try posting here.
Synopsis: The book, Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe by F.M.H. Markham Fellow, first starts off with Napoleon's father, Carlo Buonaparte, a man with a prominent position in the French government. However, the author does not focus on Carlo, but shifts the view to Napoleon, only to be using the father to show the start of Napoleon's career. The author mentions Napoleon's education and passes through his grand battles and military promotions. He reveals to the reader not only Napoleon's enemies, allies, and significant others but his personality and mentality. He reveals his countless obstacles and his rise to Emperor, where initially he ends with Napoleon's exile and death. The author depicts to the reader the type of man Napoleon was and the life he led with an unbiased view. The second book I read, The Emperor and the Pope: The Story of Napoleon and Pius VII, by E.E.Y. Hales is quite different from the first. It is different in the aspect that it focuses on Napoleon's quest to gather follower through a religious tactic. He tries to help a cardinal be elected a new Pope who did not have a strong allegiance with Austria , but a man that would be willing to help France. It reveals a political battle between France and Austria, seeing as Austria had a previously strong influence.
The first book was quite interesting as it covered various moments in Napoleon's life along with his accomplishments and downfalls that brought him to the title of Emperor. The author gave little tid bits of Napoleon's personal life and not just his political and military career, such as the little girl Betsy and his sense of personality, which revealed he was human like any other. The fact that the author covered such various topics, made it interesting to read, although the writing could be bland sometimes. On the other hand, I found the second book to be quite boring and distasteful. Although the situation was interesting and the idea of gathering followers through religion was interesting, I found it rather boring. To me, it is most likely boring because i found it hard to understand how the religious system worked, and the powers that the Pope held.
Investigation: This investigation seeks to exploit how Napoleon had used religion to bring himself to power. In addressing this investigation, the paper will focus on Napoleon’s adaptability to different religions in order to gain control of the situation and create a larger group of followers. The analysis seeks to identify how Napoleon had used religion to manipulate people that would eventually help him to gain power and popularity, and how that had affected the religion of France and other European nations. Two sources that would help make this picture clear are: Napoleon and the Awakening of Europe by F. M.H. Markham and The Emperor and the Pope: The Story of Napoleon and Pius VII by E.E.Y. Hales
Methods: In order to complete the investigation I will use the information I obtained from the two books I have chosen from questia, along with other books that give information on religion(to completely understand,) and other instances where Napoleon has manipulated the people and influenced religion (also from questia). I would also look upon Napoleon's view(s) of religion and seek the long term affect on a nation or territory upon Napoleon's actions with religion.
Question: In answering the question of how Napoleon had impacted Europe and France, do we focus only on the subject we chose and integrate it with that? (Instead of like a broad explanation of how he impacted it)
To answer Katie's question I don't think Napoleon can be compared to Hitler because Hitler created mass genocide for "purification," whereas Napoleon was trying to conquer Europe without severely suppressing other nations.
Post a Comment