Napoleon Bonaparte, Corsican and Republican, General and Emperor, came from relatively humble beginnings to reshape France and shake the world. Most people remember Napoleon as the dictator who ruled France with an iron hand, who made an ill-fated invasion of Russia and who lost the Battle of Waterloo effectively ending his reign. The circumstances surrounding his rise to the Consulate and eventually Emperor of the French is less known. Eric Hobsbawn said in his book Age of Revolution 1789-1848 that, “Power was half thrust upon him, half grasped by him when the foreign invasions of 1799 the Directory’s feebleness and his own indispensability.” The truth of Hobsbawm’s assertion is what we will attempt to discover.
Napoleon had distinguished himself in two campaigns during the Revolution, The siege of Toulon as artillery commander and on 5 October, 1795 or 13 Vendémiaire year IV in the revolutionary calendar. The first earned him distrust from the Directory after the fall of Robespierre ad his cohorts as Napoleon was appointed to the post at the behest of Augustin Robespierre, younger brother of Maximillien Robespierre, the architect of the Terror. However the second, defending the National Convention from a direct attack by royalists, earned him fame and the support of the Directory. Following the events of 13 Vendémiaire Napoleon was promoted and given command of the Army of Italy. This was Napoleon’s first step towards real power.
Distinguishing himself against the Austrians during the Italian campaigns gave Napoleon an increased reputation as the ‘First soldier of France’. This was an important distinction as each successive victory for him increased his own reputation rather than the Directory’s. Following the capture of ...
... middle of paper ...
...im” , I believe that he is absolutely correct. Napoleon did not go seeking power over a nation but when he was given the opportunity to seize it and saw that there was a need for it, he did not hesitate.
Works Cited
Frank McLynn, Napoleon: A Biography, (New York, Arcade Publishing, 1988).
Philip Dwyer, Napoleon: The Path to Power, (New Haven Ct.: Yale University Press, 2008).
Georges Lefebvre, Napoleon From 18 Brumaire to Tilsit, 1799-1807, (New York: Columbia University Press, 1969). Martyn Lyons, Napoleon Bonaparte and the Legacy of the French Revolution, (London: The MacMillan Press, 1994), pp. 26.
William Watson, Tricolor and Crescent, (Westport, CT.: Greenwood Publishing 2003), pp. 48.
Iradj Amini, Napoleon and Persia, (London: Taylor & Francis, 2000).
Eric Hobsbawm, Age of Revolution 1789-1848, (London: Weidenfield and Nicholson, 1962), pp. 74
From this announcement, Napoleon competes for equivalent rights to keep the general population cheerful and not revolt. He instructs strategies to a solid tenet to his sibling. Napoleon, himself more likely than not utilized these strategies effectively before showing them to his sibling. Depicting him as force hungry is
He said that the citizens will recognize him as a soldier of liberty who is devoted to the Republic. He is saying that he is going to improve the nation under his power. Some people saw Napoleon as a terrible leader.
Napoleon Bonaparte’s attitude towards the French Revolution is one that has often raised questions. That the revolution had an influence on Bonaparte’s regime cannot be denied – but to what extent? When one looks at France after Napoleon’s reign it is clear that he had brought much longed for order and stability. He had also established institutions that embodied the main principles of the revolution. However, it is also evident that many of his policies directly contradict those same principles. Was Napoleon betraying the same revolution that gave him power, or was he merely a pragmatist, who recognised that to consolidate the achievements of the revolution he needed to sacrifice some of those principles?
As the revolution calmed, the National Assembly attempted to maintain power; however, Napoleon Bonaparte, an outstanding national general, ousted the newly set republic in a coup d'etat in 1799, imposing himself dictator of France and leading the country to new militaristic heights that prompted French nationalism and the spread of Enlightenment ideas. Even though Bonaparte’s title as a dictator, emperor in 1804, connotates a restricted freedom, he actually took great lengths to enact policies that reflected Enlightenment ideals such as freedom of religion. Bonaparte centralized France’s government and moved to consolidate all of Europe under one nation. Touting Enlightenment ideals where his soldier traveled, Napoleon's conquest set the foundation for the republics of the future.
Napoleon was a military general that participated in multiple war victories. His interests included history, law, and mathematics. His strengths as a leader benefitted in planning financial, legal, and military plans. His aspiring attitude made him believe he was destined to be the savior of France (Coffin & Stacey, 494). He favored a republic over a constitutional monarchy. When Napoleon came to power, he immediately consolidated personal power by overthrowing the five-man Directory and created a Republic. Napoleon used his status and power during the Revolution to bring out and surface Revolution ideals and help his people. Napoleon’s role in European history was the savior of the French Revolution due to the fact he accomplished most objectives that the people hoped for. Goals of the French Revolution included overthrowing the old regime of an absolute monarch, write a basic and worthy constitution, and give more rights to the third estate and limit the first and second estates power in the Estates-General.
Napoleon was an outstanding military commander and enjoyed many successful campaigns. Napoleon maintained the Revolutionary syst...
The work details the change that the French republic underwent, with the thesis of the work is stated as “This article examines why empire as a particular political model came to the fore, how it was presented to the French people, and how they reacted to it” (Dwyer 341). Dwyer like Hunt Diminishes the contributions that Napoleon makes to the revolution. Instead of being this Revolutionary Hero, Napoleon is depicted as nothing more than a puppet at the will of his colleagues. This sort of degrading towards Napoleon can be seen as “Napoleon’s reaction to these urgings appears mixed, if not hesitant, when it came to adopting heredity, but he was eventually brought around to their way of thinking.” (Dwyer 341). This sort of statement is seen throughout the work, and differs from my work on the basis that Napoleon was more than a figure head of the revolution. Napoleon wasn’t a leader who wait for instructions from his peers, like the quote above demonstrates. Instead Napoleon was a critical individual in the French revolution and was truly a revolutionary aligned with those of the year 1789. Actions such as the abolishment of feudalism, the passage of law codes, and the changing of social hierarchy throughout France reemphasize just how prominent Napoleon was in the
French Revolution brought a great number of great ideas, but ideas are not beneficial unless they are realized and stabilized. The man to stabilize the concepts of French Revolution was Napoleon Bonaparte. He started out as an Italian general and ended up being one of the greatest historical figures. First, Directors requested Napoleon's support while organizing a coup d'etat. Then, Bonaparte fought Britain in order to benefit France. Lastly, he was called to help creating a new constitution and ended up as the First Consul of France. At home, he ruled using flattery, but also he strongly resisted the opposition. Napoleon is a pro-revolutionist because he denied all the privileges of the aristocracy, created a new constitution, and also established the Napoleonic Code.
A. A. “Europe and the Superior Being: Napoleon.” The History Guide: Lectures on Modern European Intellectual History. 13 May. 2004. The 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of the 6 Dec. 2004. Karl, Kenneth.
Over two centuries after his death, Napoleon Bonaparte is revered by the contemporary world as a figure of authority, power, and a symbol of military eminence. The representation of a small man with a resonating supremacy and power has become a direct correlation to Napoleon. With this sovereignty, many actions that were injurious to France and its citizens are masked in spite of his positive achievements. Although the world shows a large amount of respect towards Napoleon, there is still dispute over whether he benefitted France during his time, as well as if he was a positive part of the French Revolution, or he was a power-
With all the glory and the splendour that some countries may have experienced, never has history seen how only only one man, Napoleon, brought up his country, France, from its most tormented status, to the very pinnacle of its height in just a few years time. He was a military hero who won splendid land-based battles, which allowed him to dominate most of the European continent. He was a man with ambition, great self-control and calculation, a great strategist, a genius; whatever it was, he was simply the best. But, even though how great this person was, something about how he governed France still floats among people's minds. Did he abuse his power? Did Napoleon defeat the purpose of the ideals of the French Revolution? After all of his success in his military campaigns, did he gratify the people's needs regarding their ideals on the French Revolution? This is one of the many controversies that we have to deal with when studying Napoleon and the French Revolution. In this essay, I will discuss my opinion on whether or not was he a destroyer of the ideals of the French Revolution.
Napoleon’s military career is what eventually led to his prominence. Napoleon began his military career above most of the other men his age. He rapidly made his way through the ranks eventually gaining a great support system. As the directory leaned more and more heavily upon the military, a coup d’état developed. Because of his military expertise, he immediately became first consul of France. The empire of France was soon to grow once Napoleon was in reign. In the 1790s the French army was near one million men, an advantage in the Austrian wars as well as future ventures. Wars raged with other European countries in the early 1800s. Napoleon was able to beat the continental coalition, thus gaining territory for France. France annexed some of Italy but also controlled states such as Spain, Holland ...
This essay will illustrate why Napoleon Bonaparte is regarded as one of the greatest military masterminds in the history of mankind. It will show the life of Napoleon from when he was a young boy, till he died in 1821. It will show how he deceived the French into giving him power, and how he used this power for his own interests. It will also reveal how Napoleon almost killed of an entire generation of France, and proved that all good things always come to an end.
As a former high-ranking military leader, Napoleon manipulated those into believing he was a Revolutionary hero. It was Napoleon’s so-called “nationalism” that was responsible for millions of deaths. The innocent lives he took and the countless countries and towns he destroyed can only be compared in modern history to Hitler and Stalin. Napoleon had an appetite for war, beginning with the 23 year period of the Napoleonic Wars.
Before being fighter, Napoleon was a brilliant statesman, he knew what he wanted and aligned the necessary resources accordingly. The use of military force was for him the last resort. After having exhaust political means, he committed the maximum possible force to maximize the chance of the success of his campaign. He avoided making the same error than Austrians who have engaged against him, in 1796, only a segment of the available forces then a second and a third, what was easy to defeat in the