In what ways was Napoleon a warrior overloard in his Treatment of his subjects? :: European Europe History

In what ways was Napoleon a warrior overloard in his Treatment of his subjects? The question asks what was Napoleons treatment of his European subjects. However first we need to learn what these subjects were and distinguish the differences between them. The states of the Grand Empire fell into one of two categories - lands annexed directly to France, or satallite states under French control but allegedly enjoying a 'modicum' of independence. The extent of Napoleon's influence varied, depending on the length of time a particular country remained under his authority. Examples of annexed territories are; Nice,Savoy, Belguim and the Germanlands west of the Rhine. These were annexed early (pre 1800) and had were quickly incorporated into the French administrative system, however these states were mainly divided into divisions for recruitment purposes. By the time of the Brumaire fuedalism as in France had been abolished in these territories. Also land belonging to the nobility or church were either confiscated or sold. All the annexed states were ruled from Paris and were regarded as extensions of the 'old France'. All new French policies were introduced like the civil code and the judicial process of civil and ccriminal courts. A semi circle of nominally independent satellite states, were mainly run by Napoleons relatives, formed a 'buffer zone' around France. These states protected the boarders of the French empire from any attack. Some examples of satellite states are; Switzerland, Spain, Naples and Italy. These satellite states, allegedly independent, infact had little frredom of action. Their rulers were strictley supervised and tutored by Napoleon in the way they should go. The satellite states was very different. They were never allowed to forget that they existed only to serve the intrests of France. Napoleonwanted them to fullfill a number of other valuable functions in Napoleon's imperial enterprise. They were first and foremost military vassal states and Napoleon's relationship with themwas eventually wery like that of a 'warrior-overlord', extracting the advantage from them for the minimum return. These states raised about a third of the troops for the Grand Armee. The distribution of crowns among Napoleons relatives served two purposes for him. One of the two was that they would remain loyal to him no matter what. Also, with such a large number of Bonaparte sovereigns available he could expect in due course to arrange useful marriage alliances with older royal houses and give his successors the dynastic respectability the family presently lacked.

Augustine: Free Choices of Will Essay

St. Augustine’s On Free Choice of the Will elaborates on the relationship between God, free will, and evil. During the very beginning of Book One, he asks the question, â€Å"isn’t God the cause of evil† (Cahn 357). From this question, it can be ascertained that he searches for a connection between God and evil (sins), which inferred in the writing to be connected though free will. He believes that God does not create evil, but rather that evil is simply the lack of good, since God is completely good and, therefore, cannot create evil. God not being the source of evil is then further elaborated through his explanation of a crime and how it is caused by inordinate desires and human abuse of good things (Cahn 360). By explaining things this way, he shows that humans are responsible for evil, through their own wills. Of course, being that God is supposed to be in control, he further elaborates that God gives us free will in order to punish us righteously for this. He believes that God has given humans free will so that they would be able to sin and justifies God by writing that â€Å"the very fact that anyone who uses free will to sin is divinely punished show that free will was given to enable human beings to live rightly, for such punishment would be unjust if free will had been given both for living rightly and for sinning† (Cahn 361). Essentially, he is writing that God gives humans free will as a way to measure whether or not they can live righteously, while being tempted with ‘evil’ desires. I agree with Augustine’s logic regarding free will being the cause of evil, but there is a major fallacy which I will also explain. Augustine argues that â€Å"God is a cause of the second kind of evil, but in no way causes the first kind†¦ for there is no single cause of evil† (Cahn 357). While this statement is logical, since it can be said that God’s creations are the cause of evil and not God, it can also be somewhat interpreted as being flawed in the same sense. If God is the creator of everything, then does he not also have a hand in the creation of his creations? He is supposed to be the omnipotent being that has the master hand in every sense of life, so he should have more than just a secondhand blame for the creation of evil. However, since he is not directly the creator of evil and everything is inherently good, Augustine’s argument that God’s hands are ‘clean’ of evil is logically sound. Augustine’s assessment of free will being the cause of evil is also a logically sound argument. By providing an example of a mistreated slave killing his owner as a result of his innate desire (Cahn 360), he shows that it was through the slave’s ‘free will’ that evil was done. This shows that God, since he has given humans free will, had no part in said evil, since if he has indeed given the slave free will, then the creation of evil was entirely in the slave’s hands. If free will is indeed given to humans by God for the purpose of deciding if they can keep righteous through temptations, then it is clearly shown here that this is true. What a person manufactures in his mind is influenced by his surroundings and himself (multiple factors) and what he decides to do (free will) is completely in his hands. This logic shows that free will is the cause of evil. However, there is a major factor which I also disagree with and unravels much of the argument for me. The main issue is that God is omnipotent, but has given humans free will. That in itself is a huge contradiction, which Augustine attempts to answer by saying that â€Å"God foreknows this power [our will]†¦ since he whose foreknowledge never errs foreknows that I will have it† (Cahn 366-367). This sounds like he is simply speaking in circles about the subject. He tries to say that God knows about the future, but he knows about our free will, which will give us the power to decide things, but in the end is also foreknown by God. This is where I start to defer from his beliefs, since I believe that free will is the cause of evil, but that God should be taken out of the equation. While it can argued that God only knows of all the possibilities and not what will directly happen, which would make it so that he is providing free will and is part of a triangle relation between himself, free will, and evil, it is simply much more logical to believe that if there is a God, then there is no free will, and if that is such, God is the originator of evil. Augustine’s work is extremely logical and provides much evidence proving that free will is the cause of evil. He explains very clearly that evil is a result of human desire and their free will to do what they want. The most major flaw in his argument is that there is an omnipotent being that controls everything, yet doesn’t control everything, which would unravel his entire argument, resulting in evil being created by said being. Thus, the message that God exists would actually be detrimental to the argument that free will is the cause of evil. However, Augustine writes that â€Å"I hold by faith, not by something I see for myself† (Cahn 362), which means that God is not proven, so logically he doesn’t exist. Therefore, if God were to not exist, humans were innately given free will, and evil is not created from another source, it can be logically deduced that Augustine’s analysis of free will being the cause of evil is correct. Works Cited Cahn, Steven M. Classics of Western Philosophy. 7th ed. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Pub. , 2006. Print.

Cretaceous-Tertiary Mass Extinction

Scientists across several disciplines, including geology, biology, and evolutionary biology, have determined that there have been five major mass extinction events throughout the history of life on Earth. For an event to be considered a major mass extinction, more than half of all known life forms in that time period must have been wiped out. Cretaceous-Tertiary Mass Extinction Probably the best-known mass extinction event took out all the dinosaurs on Earth. This was the fifth mass extinction event, called the Cretaceous-Tertiary Mass Extinction, or K-T Extinction for short. Although the Permian Mass Extinction, also known as the Great Dying, was much larger in the number of species that went extinct, the K-T Extinction is the one most people remember because of public fascination with dinosaurs. The K-T Extinction divides the Cretaceous Period, which ended the Mesozoic Era, and the Tertiary Period at the start of the Cenozoic Era, which we currently live in. The K-T Extinction happened around 65 million years ago, taking out an estimated 75% of all living species on Earth at the time. Many people know that land dinosaurs were casualties of this major mass extinction event, but numerous other species of birds, mammals, fish, mollusks, pterosaurs, and plesiosaurs, among other groups of animals, also went extinct. Asteroid Impacts The main cause of the K-T Extinction is well documented: an unusually high number of extremely large asteroid impacts. Evidence can be seen in various parts of the world in layers of rock that can be dated to this time period. These rock layers have unusually high levels of iridium, an element not found in large amounts in the Earths crust but is very common in space debris such as asteroids, comets, and meteors. This universal layer of rock has come to be known as the K-T boundary. By the Cretaceous Period, the continents had drifted apart from when they were one supercontinent called Pangaea in the early Mesozoic Era. The fact that the K-T boundary can be found on different continents indicates the K-T Mass Extinction was global and happened quickly. Impact Winter The impacts werent directly responsible for the extinction of three-quarters of the Earths species, but their residual effects were devastating. Perhaps the biggest issue caused by the asteroids hitting Earth is termed impact winter. The extreme size of the space debris vaulted ash, dust, and other matter into the atmosphere, essentially blocking out the Sun for long periods of time. Plants, no longer able to undergo photosynthesis, began to die off, leaving animals with no food, so they starved to death. Its also thought that oxygen levels declined due to the lack of photosynthesis. The disappearance of food and oxygen affected the largest animals, including land dinosaurs, the most. Smaller animals could store food and needed less oxygen; they survived and thrived once the danger passed. Other major catastrophes caused by the impacts included tsunamis, earthquakes, and possibly increased volcanic activity, yielding the devastating results of the Cretaceous-Tertiary Mass Extinction event. Silver Lining?   As horrific as they must have been, mass extinction events were not all bad news for those that survived. The extinction of the large, dominant land dinosaurs allowed smaller animals to survive and thrive. New species emerged and took on new niches, driving the evolution of life on Earth and shaping the future of natural selection on various populations. The end of the dinosaurs particularly benefited mammals, whose ascendance led to the rise of humans and other species on Earth today. Some scientists believe that in the early 21st century, we are in the middle of the sixth major mass extinction event. Because these events often span millions of years, its possible that the climate changes and Earth changes—physical changes to the planet—that we are experiencing will trigger the extinction of several species and in the future will be seen as a mass extinction event. Sources K-T Extinction: Mass Extinction. Encyclopaedia Britannica.Cretaceous-Tertiary Extinction Event. ScienceDaily.com.Why Did the Dinosaurs Go Extinct? National Geographic.