Napoleon himself? No, the world would take quite a while to conquer. His descendents perhaps, but only for a while. China would assimilate the conquers like always, and good like keeping Russia under the thumb. Perhaps a federation of Republics/Empires under French guidance?
To have him be the actual literal ruler of the world would be ASB.
But have him avoid the disaster of the Russian campaign and have him lord and master of western and central continental Europe, then follow on from his descendants that would be cool.
Nappy VII? Fah, it'd probably take twice that time, roughly to the reign of... Napoleon XIV.He didn't say WHICH Napoleon, after allNapoleon VII might do it.
He didn't say WHICH Napoleon, after allNapoleon VII might do it.
Having steamships doesn't mean that Napoleon would automatically beat the Brits and conquer London. The Corsican artilleryman definately put emphasis on the army over the navy in general, and never had a real good idea of what to do with all those ships.The one that the photo shows. We know that an American inventor approach him with plans to build a fleet of steam-engine war ships. But Napoleon believed that they were too unrealistic. If those plans became a reality the Royal Navy will be not match and could have easily invade England. Already the Brits were scared of him more than Hitler 100 years later.
The one that the photo shows. We know that an American inventor approach him with plans to build a fleet of steam-engine war ships. But Napoleon believed that they were too unrealistic. If those plans became a reality the Royal Navy will be not match and could have easily invade England. Already the Brits were scared of him more than Hitler 100 years later.
, but I'd say he'd have to use all those resources just to keep the population content-- it was already backfiring in Spain, after all.