Modern Europe Assignment

By Divya John year History St. Stephens College Q. Assess the impact of Napoleons policies on France and Europe. One wonders how France under Louis XVI had known no success in domestic policy or any luck in foreign policy and yet within 15 years managed to dominate Europe. The answer lies in the military and administrative genius of Napoleon. One can even attribute his marvelous destiny to the gift of the revolution. France in 1799 was primarily rural in nature. According to Alfred Cobban, 95 per cent of Frances 26 million lived in rural areas such as isolated farms, villages and small country towns. Agriculture was primarily primitive in nature unlike England which had already begun the process of mechanization. Industry too was at its infant stage. The Revolution didnt add or subtract the basic resources of France but altered the way she could use them. France had the potential of becoming a super power. She had the largest population under a single government along with the richness of her resources. She had the technical skill and equipment second to none. All she needed was a great general with a vision to unleash her true potential which she got in form of Napoleon. His rule marked the close of the revolution, a return to order and stability. Napoleon Bonaparte was a realist, an ambitious military commander, a pupil of history who worshipped great conquerors like Alexander the great, Caesar and Augustus. He detested feudalism, civil inequality and religious intolerance and at the same time his policies were oppressive to women. This is what makes Napoleon so interesting; his mind was so complex that till today one isnt able to decode the genius of Napoleon. 3rd

French historian Georges Lefebvre said, Beneath the soldier's uniform, however, there dwelled several personalities. Louis Bergeron says the he was the last of the enlightened despots and a prophet of the modern state. In the following essay I shall study whether Napoleon embodied the French Revolution along with social, political and economic implications of his policies on France and Europe. Jean Jacques Rousseau in the Social Contract talked of the valor and fidelity with which the people of Corsica dealt with travesty. He said that one day this island would astonish Europe. This couldnt have come any truer as from it would emerge a great lawmaker and conqueror full of valor who would change the world after him. Napoleon Bonaparte was born there in Ajaccio on 15 th August 1769. As a child he became very passionate about Corsica's independence movement and as it was fighting for independence from France, he hated France. Napoleon grew up with very little money. However, he benefited from the amnesty given by the French king to former Corsican rebels. He was educated in the French mainland at the expense of the royals. Frederic Masson says that Napoleon was always moved by the clan spirit that was typical of Corsican tradition. This explains over-tender care for his family and nepotism that existed during his rein. Napoleon entered military school at 9. He was often bullied for his thick Corsican accent. Being condemned to poverty, he did better in school and took deep interest in History, Math and Geography. It was history that captured his imagination and he aspired to bring a great conqueror. Over time Napoleon quickly rose through the ranks of the French military. At the age of 25 he became the brigadier general by the Committee of Public Safety. He was a superb military commander and with his speed and deception he brought glory for the republic. With his Italian campaigns he won the confidence of his countrymen, his confidence, supreme charm, swiftness in making decisions helped him win support among the high ranks. After a defeat in Egypt, Napoleon disbanded his army returned back to Paris and took part in the coup d'tat that overthrew the directory.

As Napoleon was brought to the chief office of republic, there was a feeling that a new era had opened. As First Consul he slowly began reconstruction by centralizing and concentrating power in his own hands. Sieyers came up with the initial proposal of a new constitution. In his own words, Authority must come from above and confidence from below. However Bonaparte was determined that he should have the ultimate power of executive authority and the power of the other two consuls was nullified to a great extent. He did this with an advisory senate, a legislative body which could vote but not speak and a Tribunal which could speak but not vote. Sieyers who had written the birth certificate of the revolution had now signed its the death warrant by giving Napoleon power. Napoleon rose in power by winning favor by his personal charm or giving material favors to men of any party who forgot their principals. He won support from the poor too who saw in him their savior, their hero. But was Napoleon one of the last enlightened depots or the first modern day dictator. He was a bit of both. He did fulfill the ideals of the people of France by giving them the Napoleonic code which to a certain extent enshrined the ideals of the revolution, Libert, galit, fraternit. At the same time he was never elected to power and the electorate was hardly given an option. They were simply given 3 days to sign their acceptance or rejection of the constitution. The results were exaggerated to a great extent and in reality Bonapartes constitution won a fewer votes than those who officially supported the Jacobin Constitution of 1793. His regime pursued three main aimsgreater centralization of power, reconciliation of the old regime with the new and cultivation of the support of the notables. He never allowed dissent and all administrative decisions had to pass through him directly. The best example of this would be the Council of state. They were a set of advisors who didnt possess any political power but provided Napoleon the expertise he needed in all fields of government. It was the real legislative organ which was to draw various laws and administrative regulations but without no real power. He said, There are great things to be done; from that I will draw my ambassadors and ministers. He blatantly rejected the whole concept of democracy and the hope that one day men will be civilized to rule themselves. Also like in the case of modern dictatorial regimes where the press is a mere instrument of propaganda for the regime the case of similar
3

during the rein of Napoleon. He excelled at garnering public support and increasing public morale by capitalizing on his victories to convey a persona of success and heroism. A wide range of media including theater, art, newspapers and bulletins were used to promote the precise image he desired. A censorship controlled publication of books and theatres were put under the Ministry of police and were reduced to just 8 in Paris. Even most of the paintings in this period were mere propaganda. One can clearly see this in David's Napoleon Crossing the Alps which glorifies Napoleon as a heroic figure charged up on a horse crossing the Alps. While in reality his journey across the Alps in the harsh winters on a mule wasnt as heroic as depicted. Hence literature and art could not flourish in this harsh period of the Empire. Alan Forrest in his biography Napoleon wrote that the greatest single initiative of the consular period and one that Napoleon was the most proud of was the Civil Code. He was realistic in his approach and his executive capabilities and ruthless strength of will imposed a new framework on France. Napoleon made significant administrative and judicial changes within France. He played an important role in the codification of laws and the new education system which he constructed. Alfred Cobban says that the code was the most powerful instrument of bureaucratic control that the western world had seen since the Roman Empire. He made various laws and reforms on education, property rights, family law and individual freedom which are still relevant in modern day France. The code was emulated all over the world. His system of secular secondary education was an important cornerstone in uniting France. Bonaparte chose his legal eagles very carefully and they came up with the most creative reforms. Bonaparte presided personally over half of the meetings and intervened when legal rights of women were under review. His energetic supervision was responsible for quick transformation and implementation of complete code of civil law remarkable for its compactness and accessibility. The civil code was promulgated in 1804. Martyn Lyons says that France had local traditions interacting with Roman, feudal and then Revolutionary laws, making it a country of great judicial diversity. The main purpose of the civil code was to make order out of these
4

puzzling legislations of the past and give it a systematic and definitive form. France was given a new social character which would combine the Ancient regime customs along with revolutionary innovations. The civil code was applied uniformly in every corner of France and it created a strong sense of unity, nationalism and pride amongst the people. Bonaparte created a legal uniformity which the monarchy had always dreamt of doing. He gave his subjects equal rights and duties under laws which were universal, rational and secular. The code ensured equality before the law despite the social standing of the citizen. The code also ended feudal privileges and the seigniorial system of France which the revolution had aimed to do. Privileges were abolished, there was equality of law and career was open to talent without distinction of birth and the code was designed for a democratic and egalitarian society. The civil code embodied a modern conception of property ownership. Article 544 says one has the right to enjoy and dispose of ones property as long as its not used in a manner prohibited by law. An individual had absolute rights of ownership. This did protect the gains of the revolutionary bourgeoisie, since individual property rights were recognized within limits defined by the state. Also the code was liberal and secular when it came to introduction of civil marriage and divorce in family law. However it was conservative when it came to patriarchy as the role of fathers and husbands were strengthened and husbands were seen as the ruler of the household. It ensured that married women in particular owed their husband obedience, and were forbidden from entering into any legal contract like selling, giving, mortgaging or buying property without his permission. Husband controlled his wifes domicile and could evict her and her children anytime he wished to. Also her fidelity was penalized much heavily than her spouses. They were draconian as fathers had the right to imprison their children for a month up to the age of 16. Also legitimate children could not be disinherited and illegitimate children could not inherit property until and unless they had been legitimized. Property had to be equally divided amongst all the heirs. Conservatives felt that this would lead to depopulation in France as peasant families would limit the number of their offsprings to consolidate land.

The laws on divorce were revolutionary as marriage was earlier seen as a sacrament and now it was being secularized. In the Ancient regime divorce was completely illegal. However, during the revolution the policy was more liberal and divorce was much easier and inexpensive. The most startling innovation of the 1792 law was to allow divorce by mutual consent. There were unfair accusations made that the revolution encouraged immortality and a cynical attitude towards marriage but later they were dismissed. Divorce had liberated thousands of couples. Many also felt that divorce laws would destroy family an institution of social stability. Lord Castlereagh a British statesman said at the Congress of Vienna, There is no point in destroying France; the civil code will do it for us. The civil code permitted divorce on three grounds: ill-treatment, criminal conviction or adultery. Coming to adultery, women who were convicted of it were liable to two years in prison while that wasnt the case for men. The civil code was ahead of its time but it was highly misogynist and patriarchal in nature. The legal status of women was dramatically improved by the French revolution, but Bonapartes civil code put brakes on it. Napoleon reportedly proclaimed on issuing his code, Women ought to obey us. Nature has made women our slaves! The revolution had encouraged womens civil rights as the divorce law indicated. However, there was no mention of womens political rights. They still werent given the legal right to vote and were denied a political existence even after they were active participants in the revolution. A commercial code was introduced in 1807 and in 1808, a code of criminal procedure. The penal code of 1810 was conceived in spirit of utilitarianism, valuing public order above the need for retribution for the criminal. Death penalty was retained for arson, murder and forgery. Napoleons educational reforms and creation of the lyces (secondary schools) were equally important. Napoleon set up four grades of school; primary, secondary, lyces (schools run on military lines) and technical schools. Napoleon thought his regime wouldnt be secured until and unless the youth of France from an early age were not taught to respect and abide by its laws and institutions. Schools should impart values of hard work, discipline, obedience and loyalty
6

to nation as a guarantee to social and political obedience. However the revolution destroyed this as the church no longer dominated education as church property was nationalized. Earlier teachers enjoyed considerable independence in teaching and students were allowed to learn what they wanted to. However this wasnt compatible with Bonapartes vision of a uniform system of state secondary education, with a well-defined hierarchy of schools all supervised by the ministry of education. The lyces was Bonapartes lasting legacies. However, the French education system became highly centralized and standardized. Local customs were neglected as a result. The educational law of 1802 revealed the Consulates priorities. They were in educating the middle class elite at secondary level who could serve the states military and administrative apparatus in the future. The curriculum of the lyces wasnt scientific but it was dictated by the needs of professional training. Classical literature like Greek and Latin was taught along with Voltaire and Rousseau. The course was structured over 6 years and the librarys contents were regulated by the government. All government schools used identical texts. The government reserved 2400 scholarships for sons of soldiers and civil servants. This was a ladder for the educated bourgeoisie to climb the ladder of leadership and power. His main aim was to train the bourgeoisie for careers in state service. Nevertheless, his system of national state structure still exists today. The First Consul did not regard formal education of women as important; he believed that girls cannot be brought up by anybody better than their mothers. Public education wasnt necessary because they wouldnt enter public life. Their final destination was marriage. Hence, here we see that despite being a man of enlightenment, his policies towards women were highly backward. Napoleonic code of 1804 also employed men on merit regardless of their past. This policy was summed up in Bonaparte's often-quoted phrase, "Let the path be open to talent". One example can be the Lgion d'honneur, recognition of merit, admitting men of any class. Men were judged not by their wealth or family but by their capabilities such as military strength, scientific or artistic capabilities. Anybody from a Jew to a Muslim to a Protestant could win it on the basis of merit.
7

The Napoleonic codes had important implication not only for Europe but the rest of the world. It promised to liberate Europe from the clutches of feudalism and clericalism. It was introduced in various parts of Europe such as Belgium, Netherlands, Switzerland and Italy. It also inspired law codes in Egypt, South America, Louisiana, Japan and Yugoslavia. This shows that he was a child of the enlightenment. Now I shall move on to talk about the Concordat of 1801. One shall ask how Napoleon, the son of the revolution, sought to bring back the church with the Concordat; he did it primarily not just to re-establish order but also to preserve his vested interests. Napoleon understood the political importance of religion; he saw it as social cement. He knew religion was important to keep people subjugated and in check. This is reflected in his quote Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet. Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich. Also there was a feeling of strong Catholic revival in large parts of France. Reconciliation was the best way Napoleon could win favor and approval from the common people. The best way to satisfy the religious hunger in the people and at the same time keep the French bishops in check was to bring the Pope back to France. Catholicism was declared religion of the great majority of the French" but not the official state religion. This maintained religious freedom, particularly with respect to Protestants. He sought to destroy the influence of the French clergy and this would have been possible only by bringing the Popes authority back to France. Important clauses of the Concordat were recognition of alienation of church lands as permanent and acceptance of clerical salaries by the state. No papal representative was allowed to function in France without the permission of the government. Bishops were placed under close control of the prefects and the lesser clergy had lost all Episcopal authority it had formally enjoyed. Louis XIV had formerly thought of doing the same thing too. Hence, we see that Napoleon cleverly maneuvered the Pope into coming back to France, curtailing the powers of the papacy and at the same time, gave people what they wanted. Coming to the important changes in Europe during the rein of Napoleon, one sees a certain hypocrisy. He abolished slavery in
8

France while in certain colonies of France slaves were required for sugar cultivation. As France secured trading monopoly in West Indies, slavery was re-established where it had earlier been abolished, Negros were excluded from France and mixed marriages were prohibited. While on one hand Negroes were oppressed, the Jews were emancipated from the ghettos. A new wave of modernization and liberalization spread across Europe with French occupation in Italy, Germany and the Netherlands. There was a stern attack on feudalism and power of the church. French expansion gave serious blows to institutions of the old regime. Equality of all citizens before the law was recognized and the jury system was introduced. Civil marriage and divorce were made legal. Individual property rights were recognized and inheritances introduced. But the positive impact of social changes in the occupied territories was driven by Napoleons own imperialist aggression. The military and economic exploitation to which they were subjected to was brutal. The benefits of French administration were many, but they did not include the opportunity to put into practice the ideas of democratic self-government. Parliamentary rule had ended in France. One sees a breakdown in the feudal relations and how it had a deep social and economic impact on development. There was a move towards a more modernized, liberal and a capitalistic Europe. Feudal ties were breaking and there was a defense of individual property rights. It depends on the way some people looked at French expansion. Some looked at the French as liberators while others looked at them as oppressors. As in the case of Holland, its legendary wealth of bankers in Amsterdam was astonishing and the greed of French military personnel gave rise to dissent. Napoleon did put an end to this looting by his subordinates but he also curbed local aspirations towards self-determination and democracy by wanting to impose a uniform structure throughout Europe. He also gave the Bank of France. Talking of feudalism one shouldnt deny the fact that Napoleon did protect the interests of the bourgeoisie and the enlightened class to a great extent. Destruction of feudalism did promote individual
9

property rights and agricultural development could be boosted. However, the French reforms made it difficult for the free landowning peasantry to emerge as it protected the interests of the large landowning class. The landowning class became rich, powerful and cohesive. One can clearly say that Napoleonic revolution may have promoted social equality but it gave rise to individualism and didnt increase the number of peasant properties. Stuart Woolf says that French administration was enlightened and embodied a scientific approach towards government, finance and law. This endows the Napoleonic Empire of having a forward view and credits it with having a vision. It ignores the number of lives scarified by the millions of peasants recruited from isolated villages all over Europe who gave their life for their hero Napoleon. Martyn Lyons says that this was a very ethnocentric model of imperial expansion. The French believed the French revolution had given them an enlightened government and they alone had access to progressive values like liberty, equality and fraternity. This was the same justification the British gave for its aggressive imperialistic expansion in the East. Once can conclude by quoting Georges Lefebvre, Whatever Napoleon might do: in the eyes of Europe, he was still the soldier of the Revolution.

10

Bibliography 1. Bergeron, Louis. France under Napoleon. Trans R.R Palmer. Princeton: New Jersey, 1981. 2. Forrest, Alan. Napoleon. Quercus: London, 2011. 3. Ellis, Geoffrey. The Napoleonic Empire. Palgrave Macmillian: New York,1991 4. Lefebvre, Georges. Napoleon: From Tilsit to Waterloo 1807 1815. Books on Tape, Inc. (October 9, 1992) 5. Rude, George. Revolutionary Europe 1783-1815. WileyBlackwell; 2nd Edition edition (3 Nov 2000) 6. Cobban, Alfred. The Social Interpretation of the French Revolution. Cambridge University Press; 2 edition (27 May 1999) 7. Lyons, Martyn. Napoleon Bonaparte and the Legacy of the French Revolution. Palgrave Macmillan, 1994 8. Thompson, David. Europe Since Napoleon. Penguin; New Ed edition (29 Nov 1990)

11