Wednesday, November 21, 2012

Napoleon Bonaparte


Napoleon Bonaparte, like Caesar, was a controversially famous man who started out as a military leader and then shifted into leading a nation. Napoleon started out fighting on the side of the French Revolution against Austria, Prussia, and Great Britain; these were nations that wanted to put a French King back in power. First, Napoleon stormed into Italy and conquered most of it. Then he showed up in Egypt and caused a huge ruckus over there before coming back to Paris and declaring himself Emperor of France with the influence he had gained by being a daring commander. With the authority of an Emperor, Napoleon decided to conquer Belgium, then the Netherlands, then Austria, then Denmark, then Prussia, then Spain... You get the picture. Napoleon led the French in creating one of the world's largest empires before making the poor choice of invading Russia. Once his troops were destroyed there, many of the nations that he had seized decided to rise up and take Napoleon down while they had the chance. They won and exiled him to an island off the coast of Italy. Then, to everyone's surprise, he came back and took control of France! The allied nations had to come together once more in order to defeat Napoleon for the last time and to take away all of his powers.

What made Napoleon so impressive that he could conquer almost all of Europe while leading a country that had just gone through one of the nastiest revolutions in history? A big part of this was his capacity to lead. Like Caesar, Napoleon had an immense ability to inspire his men to believe in him and do great things. The difference between Caesar and Napoleon here, though, was that Caesar's influence came from camaraderie while Napoleon's came from charisma. Napoleon was very good at casting himself in the best possible light and in creating a sort of mythology around himself. He also spoke to his men as if what they were doing was the most important thing in the world. This encouraged his men to new heights of energy, as they utterly believed that Napoleon and France's work was to redefine civilization and release people from the control of kings and queens across Europe. While ruling France, Napoleon also showed a mind for good reforms. He revamped the French legal system, made it so that promotions were based on merit, and created many new schools for the middle class.

On the flip side, Napoleon could be a very questionable leader on a number of points. When it came to choosing new leaders for the countries he conquered, Napoleon often appointed his family members into the positions, no matter how bad they were at the job. He also became so obsessed with his self-image that he tried to intimidate every foreign power into submission that he came across, which resulted in much resentment and hostility toward France. Lastly, Napoleon was very free with the lives of his men in battle, and often made orders that killed tens of thousands of Frenchmen. He brought endless war to his people and was removed from his position by outside forces.

The Arc de Triomphe in Paris - Built by Napoleon

Does the good qualities here outweigh the bad when it comes to regarding Napoleon as a great leader? What do you all think? What made him so successful? What caused him to fail? How does Napoleon measure up to Caesar? Who was the better leader and why? Share in the comments section below!

Sources and Further Information -

Friday, November 16, 2012

Assignment for Thanksgiving Break


Hey guys,

I know everyone is groaning already, but bear with me!

THANKSGIVING ASSIGNMENT:

1. I want you to ask your parents about their favorite president. Write down their answer.
2. Then I want you to ask them what made that president a great leader. Write down what they say. Don't worry if they like the president for reasons other than his leadership. It's still worth writing down!
3. When we come back to class on Monday the 26th, be ready to talk about this in groups with others in  the class. I'll also be writing down which presidents your parents liked the most, and then we'll try and figure out why the #1 choice was the favorite, based on how he led the country.

Really, this is more homework for your parents than for you, if you think about it. So have fun quizzing them! I'll see you all in a week, and have a Happy Thanksgiving!

Wednesday, November 14, 2012

Julius Caesar


Julius Caesar is arguably the most famous leader of the Roman Empire, and for good reason! This was a man who spent most of his adult life at war. First, the Senate of Rome commanded him to conquer Gaul (our France). Nobody expected him to get very far but, in just a few years, Caesar had not only taken over that huge territory but also parts of Hispania (Spain) and Britannia (England) as well! Soon he had become so successful that people back home at Rome were frightened that Caesar might come back and take over the Empire. They started attacking his name at home to try and collect support to oppose him. Instead, this caused exactly what they had feared. Caesar marched on Rome, took it over, and then went to war with every senator who stood against him. This had him traveling from Greece, to Egypt, and back to Rome before he was done. When he settled in as emperor, he created a lot of programs that helped the poor and made Rome function better than it ever had. But this scared the remaining senators, who decided to assassinate him. Thus Caesar died before he could implement many of the policies that he wanted.

What made Caesar so successful? Conquering France, parts of Spain and England, and then seizing control of the largest Empire in the world wasn't something he could do by himself. So was it leadership then? Caesar's men loved him. He always made sure to pay them on time, inspire them into battle, and give them land after they served him well. He was wildly popular with the poor people of Rome. A big part of this was because he knew how important their support was; he made sure to give away lots of money and food whenever he could so that he could count on them, especially when he came back to rule Rome. When he was emperor, he also made the Roman Senate bigger so that he could have foreign noblemen from Gaul come in to be a part of it. By doing so, he made it so that the lands that he had conquered were far less likely to rise up against him. They felt represented.

But, then again, Caesar must have failed as a leader in some respects. After all, he was assassinated by a number of the Romans he was supposed to be leading! It's also worth pointing out that just because someone is good at leading an army doesn't mean they are good at leading a country. Julius Caesar tried to put in programs that helped the people, but he did this in a way that did not include the upper class, which angered them immensely. Lastly, Caesar changed Rome's government from a republic to a dictatorship. It never changed back, and future emperors were so bad at their job that the Roman Empire eventually fell apart. As a result, it could be argued that Julius Caesar was the original cause of the Roman Empire's destruction!

The Colosseum of Rome

What do you think? Was Julius Caesar a good leader or a bad one? Or was he a mix of both? What do you think is the most important quality of a leader? Does Julius Caesar measure up? Share in the comments section below!

Sources and Further Information -
http://www.biography.com/people/julius-caesar-9192504
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/caesar_julius.shtml
http://www.livius.org/caa-can/caesar/caesar01.html
http://www.history.com/topics/julius-caesar