After watching the documentary “Napoleon and the Germans;” I had a clearer view about his influence on Europe’s history.

This set of documentaries narrates in 2 seasons the most important events in the history of Germany in 2 seasons.

We should definitively get rid of the idea of an unifiedwe have today that Germany, was we today know,unified at that time.

What we had then was the “Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation” thatwhich hads little to do with the current country.

It could be described roughly as a set of autonomous territories under the leadership of the Holy Roman Emperor, a very prestigious title that, in fact, was not always coupled with a great executive power, then since it was limited by local rulers like kings, dukes, or bishops, who werehad the maximalost authority in their domains.

The links between the different regions of the Holy Roman Empire were very loose, and, as a matter of fact, we could say that the role as an unifying element ought to be given to the German tongue.

That was really the common factor among all those, in their majority,the majority of all those small states.

As an indirect consequence of his expansionist policies, Napoleon achieved that a lot of the German reigns fought united against hima lot of the German states united to fight against Napoleon.

it is unclear what the German reigns are, I interpreted it to mean the small states of the HRE

It is true that he brought new advances to the “conquered” territories, especially the so -called “code civil” of France.

At the end, it was the high pressure that France applied to these territories that was the decisive factor against Napoleon.

After watching the documentary “Napoleon and the Germans”, I had a clearer viewbetter understanding about his influence on Europe’s history.

WDuring that era, we should definitively get rid of the idea of an unified Germany, as we know today know, at that time.

It could be described roughly as a set of autonomous territories under the leadership of the Holy Roman Emperor, a very prestigious title that, in fact, was not always coupled with a great executive power, t. Then it was limited byto local rulers like kings, dukes or bishops, who were the maximal authority inrulers of their domains.

The links between the different regions of the Holy Roman Empire were very loose and, as a matter of fact, we could say that the role as an unifying element ought toshould have been given to the German tongue.(language)

That was really the common factor among all those, in their majority, small states. states - big and small.

As an indirect consequence of his expansionist policies, Napoleon fachieved thated a lot of the German reignsstates that fought united against him.

It was the power that led the “Rheinbund”, although it was not technically part of it.

I don’t quite understand this sentence

Several of those states had rulers who had been imposrisoned by Napoleon, some of them his own relatives or people he trusted.

At that time the, opinions about Napoleon were very divided.

It is true that he brought new advances to the “conquered” territories, specially the so called “code civil” ivil code ” of France.

At the end, it was the highintense pressure that France applied to these territories which was the decisive factor (turning point) against Napoleon.

In order to fulfill his expansionist desirepolicies, France needed constantly to increase taxes or drafts,and these measures that were highly unpopular.

We should have definitively getotten rid of the idea of an unified Germany, as we today know, at that time at that time, as we now know today.

unify makes a "you" sound at the start so it doesn't follow the usual "an" convention. "a" is used instead here. (It doesn't follow the rule, sorry).

What we had then was the “Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation” thatwhich had little to do with the current country.

The links between the different regions of the Holy Roman Empire were very loose and, as a matter of fact, we could say that the role as an unifying element ought to be given to the German tolanguage.

That was really the common factor among all those, inst their majority, of those small states.

you can either say "all of those small states" meaning every one of them, or "the majority of those..." meaning most of them but not all. Using both doesn't really make sense - unless you're talking about something else and I've misunderstood.

As an indirect consequence of his expansionist policies, Napoleon achievefound that a lot of the German reigns fought unitedunited and fought against him.

"Napoleon found that..." or "Napoleon had a lot..."

It was theis power that led to the “Rheinbund”, although it was not technically part of it.

Not quite sure here

It is true that he brought new advances to the “conquered” territories, especially theFrance's so -called “code civil” of France.

AtIn the end, the decisive factor against Napoleon was the high pressure that France applied to these territories the decisive factor against Napoleon.

In order to fulfill his expansionist desire, France needed to constantly to increase taxes or drafts,. These measures that were highly unpopular.