must have been Julius Caeser.

Julius Caesar is not a Roman emperor.

The dying Gaul ? A Roman copy of a lost Hellenistic sculpture that is thought to have been executed in bronze, which was commissioned some time between 230 BC and 220 BC by Attalus I of Pergamon to celebrate his victory over the Celtic Galatians in Anatolia. http://en.museicapitolini.org/ The ?Thermae boxer? ? Bronze Greek artwork of the Hellenistic era, 3rd-2nd centuries BC (the boulder is modern and replicates the ancient one). National Museum of Rome ? Palazzo Massimo alle Terme, Rome, Italy. http://www.roma2000.it/zmunaro.html#Palazzo%20Massimo The Parthenon? A temple of the Greek goddess Athena. Its construction began in 447BC and completed in 432BC on the Athenian Acropolis, Greece. It is the most important surviving building of Classical Greece, generally considered to be the culmination of the development of the Doric order.The Temple of Olympian Zeus, aka the Olympieion ? A ruined temple in the centre of the Greek capital Athens that was dedicated to Zeus, king of the Olympian gods. Construction began in the 6th century BC during the rule of the Athenian tyrants but it was not completed until the reign of the Roman Emperor Hadrian in the 2nd century AD some 650 years after the project had begun…All Greek art… :-

“…Waldseemuller made it clear he was naming the new land after Vespucci, describing how he came up with the name America based on the navigator's first name…”http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN0332239320071203?sp=true http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/8328878.stm

Talking about the “word”, when it was created compared to what it is used today to qualify on what happened in the past.

The Aristocracy of a Merit was a Revolutionary and not Napoleonic innovation.

As you said Napoleon borrowed from previous theorists such as Jacques Antoine Hippolyte, Comte de Guibert, the reforms of preceding French governments and developed much of what was already in place. But he consolidated the practice of modern conscription introduced by the Directory.

Considered as a genius in the operational art of war- I will give you that, he was an operational genius, he sure knew how to win a battle.  It is too bad that strategically he was an utter failure.

Napoleon's biggest influence was in the conduct of warfare. Napoleon was regarded by the influential military theorist Carl von Clausewitz as a genius in the operational art of war and historians rank him as a great military commander, intensifying the Revolutionary phenomenon of total war.The Napoleonic Wars also had a profound military impact. Until the time of Napoleon, European states employed relatively small armies, made up of both national soldiers and mercenaries. However, military innovators in the mid-18th century began to recognize the potential of an entire nation at war: a “nation in arms”.  But not all the credit for the innovations of this period go to Napoleon. Lazare Carnot played a large part in the reorganization of the French army from 1793 to 1794?a time which saw previous French misfortunes reversed, with Republican armies advancing on all fronts.Napoleon himself showed innovative tendencies in his use of mobility to offset numerical disadvantages, as brilliantly demonstrated in the rout of the Austro-Russian forces in 1805 in the Battle of Austerlitz. The French Army reorganized the role of artillery, forming independent, mobile units, as opposed to the previous tradition of attaching artillery pieces in support of troops. Napoleon standardized cannonball sizes to ensure easier resupply and compatibility among his army's artillery pieces.Utter failure ??

The Metric System-Introduced by the First Republic, Napoleon just kept it

The official introduction of the metric system in September 1799 was unpopular in large sections of French society, and Napoleon's rule greatly aided adoption of the new standard across not only France but the French sphere of influence. The Napoleonic code was adopted throughout much of Europe, though only in the lands he conquered, and remained in force after Napoleon's defeat.

I pointed out that their Empire lasted 1000 years and compared it to the French Empire which lasted little more than 20 it would be just as valid to compare it to the Nazi Empire which lasted for less than 5 years. 

He was compared to Hitler most famously by the historian Pieter Geyl in 1947.  Geyl used his book Napoleon For and Against to advance his view that all historians are influenced by the present when writing history and thus all historical writing is transitory. In Geyl's view, there never can be a definitive account for all ages because every age has a different view of the past.  About the Nazis and Napoleon , David G. Chandler, historian of Napoleonic warfare, replied that “nothing could be more degrading to the former and more flattering to the latter.”  Hitler wanted to conquer Europe (see Lebensraum), not Napoleon.Don't forget that the first attempt to crush the French Republic came in 1793 when Austria, the Kingdom of Sardinia, the Kingdom of Naples, Germany, Spain and the Kingdom of Great Britain formed the First Coalition. French measures, including lev?e en masse, military reform and total war, contributed to the defeat of the First Coalition.

The vast majority of Napoleons accomplishments were negative.  He cost the lives of a few million soldiers, devastated and looted Europe, destroyed the European economy through his ?continental system?, and fostered a generation of Europeans that hated and despised all things French, even the admirable parts.  He twisted the revolution out of any semblance of the vision of the original revolutionary?s in a vain attempt at self-glorification.  The sad part is that he was as successful as he was.

Some argue that Napoleon's true legacy must reflect the loss of status for France and needless deaths brought by his rule: historian Victor Davis Hanson writes, “After all, the military record is unquestioned?17 years of wars, perhaps six million Europeans dead, France bankrupt, her overseas colonies lost.” Vincent Cronin replies that such criticism relies on the flawed premise that Napoleon was responsible for the wars which bear his name, when in fact France was the victim of a series of coalitions which aimed to destroy the ideals of the Revolution (starting with First and Second Coalition wars during the French Revolution followed by the Napoleonic wars (Third to the Seventh Coalition)The Napoleonic Wars brought great changes both to Europe and the Americas. Napoleon had brought most of Western Europe under one rule?an achievement not met since the days of the Roman Empire, although Charlemagne reduced a large area of central Europe into a single empire.The map of Europe changed dramatically in the hundred years following the Napoleonic Era, based not on fiefs and aristocracy, but on the perceived basis of human culture, national origins, and national ideology.(see Nationalism)The Napoleonic wars also played a key role in the independence of the American Colonies from their European motherlands. (leading to the Hispanic American wars of independence)After his defeat, Napoleon deplored his unfinished dream to create a free and peaceful “European association” sharing the same principles, the same system of measurment, the same currency with different exchange rates and the same Civil Code. Although his defeat set back the idea by one-and-a-half centuries, it re-emerged after the end of the Second World War. (peacefully tho)

Compare Napoleon to Octavian, Octavian ended the Roman civil wars and ushered in almost 100 years of peace.  He reunited Rome and brought peace and stability to the empire after almost 50 years of civil war.  He usurped power certainly, but he did not glorify himself, others did that.  Of the two, Octavian was by far the better statesman and national leader.

French Empire lasted 17 years…and while Octavian emerged from a Civil War context, Napoleon emerged from an “anti-revolution” European coalition war. Different contexts.Bonapartism refers to a broad centrist political movement that advocates the idea of a strong and centralized state, based on popular support. What about “Octavianism” or whatever you want to call it? TMO, similar.

Charlemagne: French? German? or other??

A scapegoat ?  :-