In this essay, I will investigate whether Napoleon Bonaparte, the son or enemy of the French Revolution, brought positive change to France or was just another tyrant. Prior to the revolution in 1 789, France was under the rule of the Bourbon family, specifically King Louis XVI. However, the revolution led to the end of the Bourbon dynasty and plunged the country into chaos with the emergence of the Federal Revolt, war, and the Terror in subsequent years (Morris 2000, 107).
Despite their political, economical, and social challenges, the French still remained hopeful in one individual who they believed could rescue and rebuild their nation. This individual was Napoleon Bonaparte, who was born in Corsica in 1769. It is worth mentioning that Corsica had recently become part of France just before his birth. Initially an artillery officer, Napoleon saw an opportunity to establish his reputation in 1793 during the Revolution when Talon rebelled. His victory over the British and Spanish fleets in this revolt led to him being promoted to the rank of Brigadier General at the young age of 24.
Despite facing setbacks such as the disintegration of his alliances and imprisonment for a brief period, Napoleon was able to swiftly advance in both military and revolutionary circles by 1796. He ultimately took control of the French empire in 1799 during the Barmier revolt, which was a result of the failure of The Directory. Napoleon’s reign lasted until 1815, during which he implemented significant reforms, brought order and stability, and established a dominant and influential European empire (Morris 110-114).
Many historians have assessed the Napoleonic era and reached differing conclusions. Some accuse Napoleon of being an enemy of the revolution, citing his despotic rule. On the other hand, some historians support Napoleon as a son of the revolution, emphasizing the positive changes he brought to both France and Europe. There are also historians who believe that Napoleon embodies both perspectives, as he was not solely a revolutionary or an enlightened despot, but rather a fusion of both.
According to Lee (1982, 19), Napoleon Bonaparte fused the Revolution and the ancient regime, resulting in a completely novel element. As a national hero, Napoleon was not aligned with either the revolution or the enemy; rather, he was an ambitious leader who prioritized decisions that benefitted both himself and France. This sometimes involved transforming the state into a dictatorship with limited liberty, equality, and fraternity. Napoleon leveraged his absolute power to implement reforms and bring stability to the government, ultimately enacting productive changes.
Napoleon introduced the Legion of Honor in 1802, which played a crucial role in implementing a merit-based system in the republic (all 2006, 1). This system abolished the influence of the aristocracy and recognized individuals based on their service to the country. It rewarded people for their abilities regardless of their socioeconomic background, eradicating privileges based on social class. The Bourbon family had favored autocracy before Napoleon’s rise to power, but he replaced it with meritocracy (Hereon Jar. 2004, 1). He structured his new government on the principles of meritocracy (PliTABLE 1995, 48), making it widely practiced in France and eventually spreading to other anti-liberal European nations like Austria. Not only did Napoleon prioritize meritocracy in France, but he also emphasized the importance of the Constitution – a legal document that limits government powers and protects citizens’ rights and freedoms.
Napoleon emphasized the Constitution of 14 September 1791, which aimed to establish merit as the basis for all societal hierarchies. This meant that there would be no nobility, peerage, hereditary distinction, distinction of orders, feudal systems, patrimonial justice, titles, names, or prerogatives derived from them, order of knighthood, corporation or decorations for which proof of nobility could be demanded, or implications of birth distinctions. The only superiority recognized would be that of public officials in the performance of their duties (PliTABLE 1).
Furthermore, Napoleon centralized the government in Paris, resulting in increased efficiency and the consolidation of government bodies into one cohesive institution. As a result, nationalism flourished within France, as the government now served not only Napoleon but the entire nation. These political reforms implemented by Napoleon demonstrate his role as a stabilizing force and an enlightened leader, dedicated to enacting lasting reforms that benefitted the French people and solidified the gains made during the Revolution (Matthews 2001, 76).
Despite being a successful soldier and a student of philosophies, he despised feudalism, civil inequality, and religious intolerance. He saw enlightened despotism as a way to reconcile authority with political and social reform, making him its final and most famous representative. In this way, he became the man of the Revolution (Leftover 1969, 68). Despite implementing positive political changes, he imposed restrictions and limitations in his domestic policy to achieve his main goal of bringing order and stability to France.
Therefore, Napoleon employed propaganda in education to instill his ideals and values in the children of France. One example of this is the imperial catechism for French children, which clearly communicated Napoleon’s educational priorities, with the assistance of the Church (Morris 117). Additionally, he utilized propaganda through the publication of Bulletins, which were edited reports highlighting Napoleon’s heroic actions, distributed in France to cultivate respect, trust, and loyalty among his soldiers (Morris 125).
Napoleon established prefects in every department who were under his control and possessed considerable authority. These officials reported directly to the Ministers of the Interior and Police. Their responsibilities included enforcing conscription, persecuting deserters, ensuring the collection of taxes, overseeing food supplies and prices, monitoring individuals who posed political threats, spreading Napoleon’s propaganda, and aiding in the expansion of commerce and trade (Morris 121).
Furthermore, Napoleon resorted to intimidation and execution to dispose of any individuals who posed as obstacles to his goals or hindered the progress in France. He demonstrated a profound understanding of how to manipulate self-interest, vanity, jealousy, and even dishonesty for his benefit. Napoleon was well aware of the power of humor and imagination in manipulating people, but he also never overlooked the effectiveness of instilling fear in them (Leftover 66).
In 1804, Napoleon officially declared himself the Emperor of France, solidifying his position as a dictator and seeking legitimacy. He also implemented the system of patronage, which resulted in the recreation of the French nobility known as the Imperial nobility. This new nobility included approximately 3,600 individuals who were granted various titles like prince, count, and baron (Morris 117).
These people were granted in exchange for their support on Napoleon and this clearly demonstrates Napoleon’s willingness to revive some of the practices of the ancient regime (Lee 19). Additionally, the government was not elected by the people. The government consisted of forty men on the council d’etat who selected another four hundred men to serve on the Legislature and vote. A facade of democracy was maintained by having members of municipal and departmental councils elected by select groups of wealthy individuals, but these bodies could only provide advice (Alexander 1995, 43).
Furthermore, Napoleon utilized the liabilities and the direct vote of all the electors of a state as a means to determine a matter of public significance. This demonstrated the overall indifference towards the constitution. Additionally, Dandelion and his plebiscites can be seen as a progressive move towards fascism by providing apparent mass validation for tyranny. Ultimately, Napoleon’s strong state control rendered weaker states futile. The economic improvements implemented by Napoleon were advantageous to the French populace.
Napoleon established the Bank of France, which later came under state control and regulated the money supply. Paper money was replaced with metal currency. The central treasury supervised tax officials and prefects, using these financial and economic policies to fund the expansion of their empire. However, these policies had adverse effects on manufacturing industries in the long run.
The decline in birth rate in France during the late sass and 1 7905 can be attributed to the ongoing wars. Additionally, the economic conditions during this period were unfavorable for population growth as young men who were potential marriage candidates were frequently drafted into the army. Consequently, there was minimal development in agriculture and industry, as capital was scarce and technology lagged behind. Thus, France remained primarily in a pre-industrial state. Despite the presence of 12,000 workers employed in cotton spinning in Paris in 1807, factory workers were scarce.
Despite promoting iron production, Napoleonic warfare suffered from outdated techniques that still used charcoal for smelting, which was a common issue in French industry. Furthermore, the industrial ages experienced decline and struggled to cope with rising prices and taxes (Morris 119). Consequently, Napoleon heavily relied on agriculture as France’s primary source of income. As a result, when droughts occurred and the harvest was meager, it triggered a financial crisis that primarily impacted farmers.
Additionally, Napoleon revived certain economic institutions of the ancient regime. Specifically, he reinstated the chambers of commerce, which had been suspended in 1791. By 1803, there were twenty-two chambers of commerce, with each one allocated to a specific department, to aid in policy formulation. However, the most notable resemblance to ancient regime practices was Napoleon’s favoring of indirect taxation over direct taxation (Lee 22).
There were undoubtedly favorable aspects to Napoleon’s foreign policy. His skill in winning wars allowed France to acquire Belgium, parts of the Venetian Republic, and large portions of Italy through the Treaty of Camp Formic in 1797. By presenting himself as both a man of peace and a god of war, Napoleon gained the support of the French people, which expanded the French Empire and led to the establishment of modern states in Europe like Germany’s Confederation of the Rhine and Italy’s Italian Republic.
Furthermore, the Treaty of Titlist in June 1807 demonstrated a significant alliance formation between France and Russia. The meeting held in Titlist allowed Alexander and Napoleon to solidify this treaty, which showcased Napoleon’s preference for diplomacy and peace rather than relying solely on war. Alongside this, the implementation of Napoleon’s Continental System in 1793 aimed to limit the entry of British goods into French territories. This strategic move served to weaken Britain and protect the Napoleonic Empire by establishing a large market for French products within its borders. As a result, the economic campaign against Britain intensified.
As First Consul in 1803, Napoleon implemented a ban on British goods in north-western Europe. Additionally, the Berlin Decrees of 1806 established a blockade against Britain, resulting in the exclusion and seizure of goods from British and colonial regions. An important aim of this system was to eliminate the dominant position of British trade in Europe. Consequently, Napoleon’s optimism increased as the Empire expanded. By 1807, the Milan Decrees further intensified restrictions by enabling the confiscation of cargo from any neutral ship that had visited a British port (Morris 119).
Napoleon had several goals in his foreign policy. Firstly, he wanted to spread revolutionary ideas such as implementing laws and getting rid of feudalism. Additionally, he aimed to dominate Europe because he desired power. Napoleon also wanted economic stability by using warfare and expansion to bring wealth to his empire. Politically, he planned to redraw the map of Europe, especially concerning Italy and the German states. Furthermore, through the Continental System, he intended to economically control Europe. Lastly, Napoleon aimed to defeat the major powers including Russia, Prussia, Austria, and particularly Great Britain. To accomplish these objectives, he had to overcome and defeat the Second, Third, and Fourth Coalition.
In spite of this, Napoleon’s foreign policy caused issues. The Continental System discontinued trade with Britain, which angered nations like Russia and led to conflicts with other European powers. This also fueled nationalism in Italy and Germany. Additionally, Napoleon focused on occupying territories and spreading Revolutionary ideas, rather than developing France itself. It is worth noting that Revolutionary ideas were not actually firmly established within France.
In the long term, Napoleon’s foreign policy was ultimately unsuccessful for a few reasons. Firstly, he struggled to maintain control over the Continental System as time went on, as it became beyond his influence. Additionally, Napoleon’s own ambitions and ego led to various defeats in battles like the Spanish Ulcer, the Russian Campaign of 1812, and Waterloo. On a positive note, one of the social improvements Napoleon introduced in France was the Civil Code. This Code ensured the elimination of feudalism, promoted equality under the law and freedom of belief, and provided limited compensation to those who had acquired church and noble lands during the prior period (Matthews 81).
Napoleon introduced positive social changes, including granting civil rights (equality before the law), eliminating class privileges, and making education widely available. However, these changes also posed challenges concerning liberty, equality, and education. Napoleon limited liberty by reestablishing a social elite and determining social status based on a narrow definition of merit (Alexander 48). He believed that the wealthy few would eventually dominate the majority of wealth.
Also, Napoleon is known for reinstating a patriarchal society and suppressing women. Due to their inability to join the military ranks, women were unable to achieve any recognition in Napoleon’s merit-based system. Feminist writers frequently highlight the Napoleonic codes as a culmination of gender bias during the Revolution. The civil code displayed consistent patriarchy, elevating the legal standing of the oldest male within a family, stripping married women of their property rights, and establishing a distinct double standard regarding divorce and serving as a legal witness (Alexander 52).
Additionally, Napoleon reintroduced ancient r©Siemens code of criminal procedure from 1808, as well as the letters De cachet and the Penal code from 1810 (including the reintroduction of branding). Moreover, there existed limited equality during Napoleon’s reign. He controlled the population through propaganda and governmental censorship, which involves the practice or policy of censoring books, plays, films, reports, etc. Furthermore, Napoleon altered the results of plebiscites, which sought the approval of the people.
Moreover, Napoleon lost the support of Revolutionary radical groups, which may have led the Revolution towards extreme liberal ideologies. It is important to note that many Jacobins had initially backed Bonaparte in 1799 but gradually abandoned their loyalty to him. While the infringement on personal freedom certainly played a role, the reintroduction of a hierarchical system likely caused even greater disruption (Alexander 47). Additionally, Napoleon exploited education to cultivate steadfast followers.
Like the church, Napoleon utilized schools to raise loyal subjects from a young age. Public education, controlled entirely by Napoleon, aimed to produce intelligent yet obedient citizens. Napoleon openly stated that the primary goal of establishing a corps of teachers was to ensure the means for directing political and moral opinions. According to him, a nation cannot be formed if individuals grow up without a clear understanding of their political and religious beliefs. Despite the negative aspects of Napoleon’s social policies, his religious policies brought the French together as a unified nation. (Durian 1963, 264)
The Concordat, a treaty between the Papacy and a state government, was a significant achievement in reconciling French Catholics to the Napoleonic regime (Matthews 81). However, Napoleon’s religious policies had their drawbacks as he used the clergy, especially bishops, to support government initiatives and strengthen its authority through conscriptions and propaganda (D). By forming the Concordat with the Pope in 1801, Napoleon ensured government control over clergy appointments and reduced papal involvement in France (Lee 25). In essence, Napoleon aimed to manipulate the church for his own agenda, evident in his treatment of the Pope during his later years in power (D). His Concordat somewhat resembled the Civil Constitution of the Clergy implemented in 1790 (Alexander 49). Ultimately, as a leader who emerged after the Bourbon dynasty ended, Napoleon was admired by many French people and succeeded in winning their support (Morris 142).
Despite occasional despotic decisions and changes, it is evident that Napoleon utilized enlightenment ideas throughout his rule. While there were negative aspects, such as intimidation and execution, his lasting impact on contemporary France should not be solely assessed based on the endurance of his positive achievements. The trauma inflicted on those who experienced his rule should also be considered (Boers 2006, 38). Nonetheless, Napoleon implemented progress, reforms, and fostered order and stability in both France and Europe. Additionally, the emergence of modern national states in Europe, including Italy and Germany, can be attributed to Napoleon.
Additionally, France became a dominant force in Europe under Napoleon’s leadership, as he united the country and conquered other nations to bolster nationalism and expand its resources and territories. Nevertheless, the downfall of the French Empire occurred after Napoleon abdicated, facing both internal and external challenges. Austria, Russia, Prussia, and Great Britain gained control through treaties and political alliances like the Holy Alliance, resulting in France’s weakened state. Nonetheless, events like the 100 days demonstrate Napoleon’s status as a national hero and a source of inspiration beyond France.
Today, Napoleon holds the distinction as one of the most influential and powerful leaders in world history. He is often compared to other legendary figures like Alexander the Great and Charlemagne.
