Europe would be worse off
Europe would become less peaceful and prosperous in the long run.
-
Every time Napoleon conquered a new land he would appoint either his relative or his close friend as a ruler of that land. Nepotism like this has nothing to do with progressivism or liberalism. On top of that, Napoleon brutally suppressed any opposition to his rule (for example during the guerrilla wars in Spain). He spilled so much blood subjugating foreign lands that many contemporaries regarded him as the devil incarnate. Most likely if he won, Europe would continue to be a blood bath because of the nationalistic sentiments in the conquered lands.
0 0 0 0 0-
Hi Antonio
Napoleon's rise to power in France had been a consequence of the bloodshed and chaos following the French Revolution. Men like him who seek power have intentions - to get to the top is one of them. And very often they clame that order should be restored. And there he had a point and that was his chance. He had become a talented military leader and had a different attitude to his soldiers than all the other generals before him. He also made sure that everyone was payed...;)
So, you could say, he was popular and his soldiers followed him almost blindly.
But he should surely be critically looked at, no doubt!
There are tons of books and films and documentations about him - I just listened to some podcast about his personal life and his death...
As we know, he was far from perfect and not everything he did was "good", quite the opposite!
Where the hell did he get the idea of conquering the better part of Europe, I wonder???
And for the countries he had conquered the results were devastating, of course.
Unfortunately, you could say, he was quite a clever man which is true for many others that came to great powers. And we should keep in mind that he knew very well how to profit from the disastrous political situation when he started his career in France - having been brought up on the small island of Corsica making his way up the ranks very quickly.
But I would like to mention something by his hands which did us some good here in Switzerland.
You know, around 1800 there was not much of a Swiss state around. It was merely a bunch of cantons (districts) that had joined each other over the centuries in order to withstand too much force by noblemen - much of which was later reported as a victory and is ground for many myths, and in some way it was, but it had not been that glorious and successful some of my Swiss fellows might think today.
So we were conquered by Napoleon too in 1798 and became a sub-state of France for a short period.
Not because we were any threat to his army but because he had foreseen some trouble coming his way.
At the time, Catholics and Protestant Cantons (districts) had been fighting against each other for quite a while and this was about to get out of hand. I guess he simply did not like the idea of watching a war going on in a neighbour country with some important passes between his territories and Italy putting trades and transports of troops and material at risks;)
He first sent his troops and then reorganized our lose state by:
- declaring that no canton should be allowed to reign over any other
- he ended territorial quarrels and set the borders between the cantons to avoid further conflicts
- he declared that Religion should not interfere with state affairs.
- he then took his time and thoroughly studied our history and consulted Swiss leaders from all sides.
- After that, he gathered all the relevant representatives of Switzerland in Paris to discuss his proposition on a new national constitution. Soon afterwards it was put into effect with some minor corrections he had accepted.
- One detail: he got away with the numerous currencies and all the import and export taxes between the cantons and implemented the Swiss Franc instead.
It was only a short period from April 12.,1798 until March 10., 1803 that he reigned over us.
So, in our case, he had achieved quite a lot in 5 years, I guess, and we profited from it, no doubt.
I guess we could not have developed into the sort of state with its direct democracy as we are today had it not been Napoleon who once and for all did away with odd things routed in the medieval past and some creepy ideas the Swiss could not get out of their heads...
To be frank - we had been a bunch of loose districts and most of the people were just poor farmers or craftsmen or minor noblemen with no clear understanding of what a state is good for...
What Napoleon learned in his early days when he fought battles in Italy was: it is not only about fighting a war successfully but - like the Romans had done that almost 2000 years ago – it is also about establishing peace and regulate things afterwards so that the economy could thrive again - and he could finance his next wars;)His empire did not last, thanks to Russia I dare say!
But it had many consequences in later centuries as we all know.
Is he as a person to blame for all of it? Had it been different if the nobility had foreseen the change of times and had acted wiser before the French Revolution? What would you say?
Europe had already been in trouble for many centuries and sort of exported what it was best at:
Wars and Conquering - to so many colonies and nations far away.
There is still some of that spirit around, I am afraid, but it is not that bad anymore, luckily!Urs
2 0 0 0 0 -
Reading you is like reading encyclopedia Urs!
Truly enlightening material.. Learning a lot from you!
I believe that Napoleon was a megalomaniac but he was a genius at the same time. He had such a strong personality that to this day he still inspires lots of people.
He definitely was a product of the French Revolution. Had the revolution not been so tumultuous, it would've been much harder for Napoleon to rise to power, I believe.. So his rise to power could've been prevented.
There's always a question as to what begets the rise of historical personalities: the circumstances they are in or their charisma and personal strength. I think for Napoleon it was both.. He used the situation to his advantage and masterfully grasped the power. Sadly or fortunately, opinions here differ, he had never enough and it led to the demise of his empire..
1 0 0 0 0
-
-
Even if Napoleon had conquered Europe and created his “great empire”, this empire would have inevitably collapsed like all great empires do after the death of the Conquerer (think of Alexander or Ghengis Khan, for example). It is highly probable that his personality as the great general would have become the core of the empire and soon after his death it would have split into different (probably antagonistic) states.
2 0 0 0 0 -
Hello Antonio
I did not know the fact that Napoleon put together and introduced the new "code civile" in France in 1804 and afterward in all territories he had conquered - so in Switzerland as well.
It remained one of the most fundamental judicial systems in many countries - based on the ideas of the "enlightenment" and the French Revolution and was based on the equality of everyone before the law, no matter what your origin and social status may be.
His abilities as a military leader and to gain power allowed him to not only collect this groundbreaking new code but to put it into practice too - and that is how he reformed not only the judicial system but the way states and nations are organized and function until now.
I clearly underestimated his commitment and contribution to this field.
Thanks for your hint, Antonio!
The other fact that I found is about the long-standing close relationship between Switzerland and France in the 18th century. Originally due to soldiers and officers serving in French but also other armies, it appears that later many intellectuals and people from trades and industries studied or worked in France. Louis XVI renewed contracts with the Swiss Cantons in 1777, guarantying the neutrality, security, and privileged trading between the two countries for another 50 years - and that is why the ideas of the Enlightenment were well known by Swiss leaders and why later the French Revolution had such an impact on Switzerland too. Swiss men like Jean-Jaques Rousseau and Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi found a keen public in France in turn.
It is good to go back in history once in a while, isn't it?
Best regards
Urs0 1 0 0 0
