Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
coolstorm
Chieftain
Joined: 11-Nov-2004
Location: Hong Kong
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1066
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Napoleon Bonaparte Posted: 18-Mar-2005 at 04:31 |
|
���DZj�~�� ��������
�� �� �C �q �D �� �� �� �� �T �� �� �g �A �� �� �� �� �� �U �N �� ��
|
|
Scytho-Sarmatian
Earl
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 290
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Mar-2005 at 05:29 |
Historians who make the claim seem to point to the British. That would not surprise me.
|
|
Paul
General
AE Immoderator
Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Mar-2005 at 07:46 |
I disagree, Britain had no need to poison him. He was their prisoner and totally under their control. And when you have an ace in your hand you don't disgard it.
Modern researchers tend to go to French royalists who were worried Britain may use him as a bargaining chip against them, were worried by discontent in the country in his name and just plain frightened he'd make another comback.
His food was prepared by his own cooks and there's been much speculation one of his servants may have been a royalist spy.
Edited by Paul
|
|
|
azimuth
Caliph
SlaYer'S SlaYer
Joined: 12-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2979
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2005 at 01:53 |
i think he died of stomach Cancer
|
|
|
Tobodai
Tsar
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4310
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2005 at 02:58 |
so do I, I tend not to jump for such theories unless I can see some real proof.
If he was poisened though, Paul is right, its more likely a Frenchman than a Briton behind it.
|
"the people are nothing but a great beast...
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
-Alexander Hamilton
|
|
Genghis
Caliph
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2656
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Mar-2005 at 19:19 |
I tend to think he was, they say that forensic analysis showed that he had arsenic levels 30 times higher than a normal persons, meaning that he had to have been ingesting large quantities of it that could not have been absorbed from the surrounding environment.
|
Member of IAEA
|
|
Aquila
Immortal Guard
Joined: 16-Mar-2005
Location: Switzerland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Mar-2005 at 21:34 |
I don't think he was poisioned, but I agree that if he was it would have been by the British.
|
Aquila©2004 Victor Chevalier
|
|
Temujin
King
Sirdar Bahadur
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5221
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Mar-2005 at 16:30 |
Originally posted by Genghis
I tend to think he was, they say that forensic analysis showed that he had arsenic levels 30 times higher than a normal persons, meaning that he had to have been ingesting large quantities of it that could not have been absorbed from the surrounding environment. |
well, Napoleon took poison after his first abdication in 1814, doctors claim this beign the reason for his stomach cancer.
|
|
Winterhaze13
Colonel
Joined: 11-Nov-2004
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 716
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Mar-2005 at 17:01 |
No, I don't think he was murdered. He wrote in his will that he was poisoned but many people say foolish things when they think they are going to die. Also, he was in exile for six years when he died and he was out of shape, so why would the British kill him when he wasn't a threat anymore.
And his father Carlo died of the same thing. The doctor concluded that it was stomach cancer without knowing that.
|
Indeed, history is nothing more than a tableau of crimes and misfortunes.
-- Voltaire
French author, humanist, rationalist, & satirist (1694 - 1778)
|
|