Civil Code Dbq

Napoleon’s Civil Code was introduced in March 1804 as France’s first set of coherent laws that replaced a system of secularity, inequality and constitutionally flawed governance which failed in being able to “maintain…liberty” in cases such as women’s rights and freedom of religion. The Civil Code was said to be the highlight of Napoleonic rule as well as his personal crowning achievement in changing the country from an era of anarchy, death and extreme Jacobin rule into a leading power amongst Europe which paved the way into modern politics with judicial matters (universal equality before law), fundamental democracy and most importantly unification of France as a whole. This essay will be questioning the motives behind the actions he took,

with regard to his foreign policy, as being self-serving and asking was this an achievement at all? Or were the civil code’s accomplishments an accompaniment of an ulterior motive set on control of the country as a tyrannical dictatorship took place led by a policed state whilst also looking at the internal flaws of the code in which Napoleon failed to see and looking at other actions that could be seen as a greater achievement such as the Concordat of 1801.
The consulate was the name given to the people who had power over France, the government, and Napoleon after coming to power in 1799 was named the first consulate for life, meaning thus forth France was now under a more centralized, autocratic form of governance in which Napoleon could not be removed from power. This is an achievement in its own right when looking at a man that transformed a nation who originated from a poor nation called Corsica when "thirty thousand Frenchmen spewed on to our shores" and quickly rose to power to be crowned emperor of France in little over 14 years since his graduation as a second lieutenant. This was made possible from the people of France being very poorly educated and the relative calm was more than appealing as opposed to the anarchy that was common-place during the reign of Louis XVI and Napoleon knew and used this to his advantage during his rise to power. Napoleon portrayed himself as a ruler whose actions were what the majority of France wanted and he was just acting accordingly to their wishes with a belief that “a throne is only a bench covered with velvet”, thus showing his supposed lack of concern with being Emperor, but a view proven to be completely nonsensical when looking at his actions during his reign and how they align with his imperialistic goal. Napoleon ruled as an egotist who believed he was above France and ruled for the sake of ruling and fulfilling his limitless ambition; being quoted to say “in a great nation, the majority are incapable of judging wisely…” showing the true nature of Napoleon as a dictator who believed “political necessity comes before everything else”. The dogmatism witnessed during Napoleon’s reign diminishes his achievements and stops the Civil Code from becoming the great achievement it could have been following its goal of global implementation but needless to say Napoleon’s effect on France was certainly a positive one given the prior chaos.
Post-revolutionary France was a much different place than it was in the beginning of the era, paternalism had run rampant and the diversity of laws from province to province varied greatly from political systems in the south taking droit écrit and the north with the pays de droit écrit - making unification impossible as laws would infringe upon one another based on location; a traveler was quoted to say that “France changes his laws almost as often as he changes his horse” showing a complete mockery of the system that was later replaced with the Civil Code and showing a huge improvement looking at what the Civil Code accomplished with unifying France.

Napoleon saw that there was not only a want for unification but a need as social unrest was commonplace upon the lower classes with the vast economic inequality and even the bourgeoisie who believed that their gains during the revolution such as freedom of ownership of land would mean them losing out as the ineffective ruler Louis XVI allowed wide-spread hunger. The reaction of revolution to this shows the public outcry for the need of change in a corrupt system of poor constitutions and a lack of concern for the lower-classes that napoleon appeared to want to put a stop to and later did when any opposition would be seen as anti- revolutionary and either exiled from France or killed. This was one of the aims of the civil code, a unified France that would be efficient under his rule and focused onto change; it was the main problem concerning the implication of the code and with it come the cost of his dogmatic ambition of not only a unified France, but

Europe.
Although it can be said that the dictatorship created by the civil code can be seen as a necessary means to meet the path he wanted France to go in, in which it would have never went if not for his complete control over the country to do so as he wished as first consulate we can still question the morality of the regime as even a modern country such as France with its rising failed to achieve democracy at a cost of implementing the Civil Code whilst also allowing some liberties in the code itself. It can be seen that power and rule was synonymous with Napoleon as only a means to fulfill his own ego as an "enlightened" ruler who wished to put himself with greats throughout history such as Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar. But completely overlooking his effects, whether intentional or not, on modern day society would be an injustice. As a result of Napoleon's warmongering and control over most of central Europe, most countries controlled by France at the time would adapt the civil code to be used to improve their system and advance the world tenfold, a feat otherwise impossible if not for Napoleon's escapades across the world.