No. Napoleon was not a revolutionary no compromise republican that would only be satisfied by the destruction of all thrones. His actions are proof of that: he declared himself emperor (meaning the most important monarchical ruler in Europe, above kings in status), he made France into a hereditary monarchy again, he created his own nobility and invited back the old French nobility that went into exile during the Revolution.

So no, he wasn't against monarchy. He wanted France to be a monarchy among other monarchies in Europe... but then, why:

>It sort of feels as though Napoleon was vilified by the Royal families revising history after his defeat.

Because while he wanted to make France into a monarchy again, he wanted to realize the dream of a lot of French monarchs before him: make France the sole superpower in Europe.

That's why he created new kingdoms (Italy, Holland) and usurped old kingdoms (Spain, Naples) and put his brothers and brothers in law on those throne: because his family should rule the largest part of Europe possible.

He also conquered a lot of territories. That's France around 1799 (when Napoleon takes power in a coup). That's France a decade later. He annexed the whole of the Benelux, western Germany, Rome, Northern Italy... and usurped a lot of kingdoms around him.

That's why he was hated. Not because he was going to hang all the monarchs... but because he wanted to take their lands and title away. And put all of Europe under France direct or indirect control.