[weikel]

Napolean might have done some good in victory but since he was defeated his legacy despite the abolition of serfdom in the areas occupied by his armies must be viewed negatively. Charlemagne probably saved Europe from sinking into barbarism for another 1000 years he nearly resurrected the Roman Empire in the West however given the customary succession laws among the Franks upon his death his realm plunged almost immediately into civil war( and the Franks before the Merovingians were overthrown by Pepin were one of the most barbaric of the barbarian tribes most of the other tryed to preserve some vestige of civilization not the Franks until Pepin anyway). The only successful modification Charlemagne was able to impose was the Salic law. To top that off a wave of Viking invasions followed and the church decided there was more power in supressing and hoarding knowledge then spreading it.

[wardaddy]

Charlemagne is viewed historically as successful and his impact was lasting.....even if compromised.

Many historians view Napolean as an astute tactician with a suprising bent towards enlightened government. The fact that he was a determined hegemony enthusiast doomed him to defeat but that doesn't dimish him to the dustbin in my view.

Regards!