What I would like to suggest is that there is a third consideration (at least) that must be taken into account when deciding Napoleon's place in history, and judging his success or failure. And that is what he did for his own country, and Western Europe in general, especially for the long term.
Let us consider a few of Napoléon's domestic accomplishments. These accomplishments show Napoleon at his best, bringing to bear his considerable skill and imagination. His policies promoted the revolutionary ideal of freeing Europe of the old regimes and uniting them in a system that rewarded the meritorious and condemned the despotic. Indeed, many consider Napoleon the first real promoter of a "United States of Europe."
An Argument
The old regimes of Europe had only one real argument in their "favour:" They provided stability, but it was a stability that enriched the few and oppressed the many. The Revolution sought to remove the inequity inherent in the system, but, inevitably, removed much of the stability as well. The Directory symbolised that lack of stability, and enjoyed almost no public support. Napoleon's coup d'etat de Brumaire (November 9-10, 1799) brought more stability than France had seen since the beginning of the Revolution in 1789. Whatever else may be said, it was this stability that made the other reforms of Napoleon possible.
Herbert Fisher in his book Bonapartism tells us:
In order to bring calm our of chaos, and reform out of despotism, it is necessary for a nation to have strong leadership. Napoleon certainly provided that. Some have suggested that this was a reflection of Napoleon's lust for power, but is hard to imagine how France would have survived, much less thrived, under any other kind of leadership. In my own country, United States, we tried a weak system under the Articles of Confederation, and got 11 years of stagnation and futility for our efforts. George Washington was able to take advantage of a strong central government that grew out of the Constitution, and only then were we able to embark on our path to greatness. Napoléon, not surprisingly, was a great admirer of George Washington.
No Principles?
Some contend that Napoléon ran the government without regard for democratic principles or procedures. I would argue that Napoleon established principles of democracy important to the ultimate development of French democracy. Napoleon would ask questions were insightful, focusing on the justice and usefulness of an issue, and its history, but the Council of State would usually make the final decisions. Napoleon almost always abided with the majority vote, though he was not required to do so. His only real requirement was hard work; they would often meet all night, and the sleepy received little sympathy from the First Consul!
The Consulate and the Empire may seem to some strong centralised rule, but compared to previous governments they were reigns of freedom. They gave France a government of regular, scientific and civilised administration in place of near anarchy. Sacrifices of liberty were balanced by gains in equality and safety, and in the restoration of economic stability. Napoléon established the principle of popular sovereignty through the repeated use of the plebiscite.
It is important to remember that France had a long history of a strong, centralised government (at least in theory), and even today is more centralised than many other western democracies. Liberté under Napoléon was far higher than liberty under the monarchs of the rest of Europe. Napoleon wrote to his brother Jerome, King of Westphalia, saying: "Be a constitutional king. It is necessary that your subjects should enjoy a degree of liberty, equality and well-being unknown to the people of Germany." Later, he wrote "If I had won in 1812, my constitutional reign would have begun."
Napoléon provided more equalité than anywhere else in Europe. Taxes were based on the ability to pay, and government scholarships were provided for the middle class. Compared with the despotic rule of other nations whose commitment to equality was marginal at best, Napoleonic France was a model to be emulated.
Napoléon fully believed the principle that every man could rise as far as his ability could carry him; his statement that in every soldiers knapsack is found a Marshals baton is well known and represents his attitude in civil as well as military spheres. In civilian life, he defended the rights of peasants and émigrés alike, and granted all men the opportunity to excel in his empire. The Legion of Honour reinforced the idea that all men could rise as far as their talents would take them. He removed the benefits of caste and privilege, granted religious freedom, and established a new economic order. These actions sent terror into the hearts of the monarchs of Europe; a terror that led to the vilification of the man and to a series of efforts to depose him.
Fraternité and Taxes
As for fraternité, Napoléon reunified the French, solved many domestic problems, and restored law and order. He made the French proud to be French, and directed their energies toward national improvements. In the words of Felix Markham, "for the first time since 1789 . . . France felt the impulse of a powerful, unified will."
During the Revolution, the financial situation in France was a disaster. Napoléon raised millions of francs from foreign bankers and a national lottery, then reformed the entire tax system.
Taxes, which had been collected by part-time workers, were now collected by a special cadre of collectors, eight for each département. These officials were required to pay as much as 5% of expected revenue in advance, thus improving the cash flow. As a result of Napoleon's improvements in the income tax system, virtually all debt was eliminated, and the country was put on sound financial footing.
Napoleon's greatest financial achievement was the establishment of the Bank of France. This bank allowed France to eliminate high interest rates for its own loans, and brought additional stability to the financial situation.
Beyond finances, Napoleon's most famous domestic accomplishment was his legal work. France's system of laws that was an unbelievable tangle of countless regional codes, courts, case law, almost 15,000 decrees, often contradictory, and other documents. Napoléon wrote "we are a nation with 300 books of laws yet without laws."
While Napoléon certainly did not write the entire "revision" of French law, he did preside at most of the meetings of lawyers, where he made significant contributions, especially in the civil code. This code reflected the needs of the middle class, who had most benefited from the Revolution and who needed assurances that their gains would last. He codified their right to keep lands gained as a result of the Revolution. He increased the power of the family, returning it to Roman legal beliefs.
The Code provided for other things as well, of course, including the right of men to enter any trade, craft, profession or religion they chose. The Code was a judicial compromise between democratic ideals and the monarchy. Most importantly, however, due to Napoleon's personal and powerful interest, for the first time in French history there was a unity of law, which is absolutely critical if a country is to rise to the greatness that is only possible when such unity is achieved.
It is, therefore, completely appropriate that this system of laws became known as the "Code Napoléon," and it is in many ways his most lasting legacy. It remains the basis of French law, as well as the law of Belgium and Luxembourg, and has greatly influenced the law of Western Europe, Mexico, Latin America, Japan, and Louisiana. There have, of course, been changes. In France, for example, there is no longer a fine of 300 francs for having a mistress!
Napoleon created an entirely new legal system; a system based on merit rather than family connection. His system of prefects brought order and stability to the départements. Most of his appointments were men of revolutionary heritage, and none had strong family connections to the départements. Napoleon's approach to the legal system was among the most liberal of the day, and met with the approval of the revolutionaries and such future critics as Madame de Staël.
Educational Reform
One of the most overlooked domestic accomplishments of Napoléon was his work in educational reform. Education was high on Napoleon's list of priorities, which reflected the needs of the middle class. For his merit system to be effective, education must be available to most men. French education was not in the best of condition in the beginning of the 19th century.
Napoleon stressed the importance of education in 1807, with these words:
Secondary education was extremely important to Napoléon, as it was the base education for the future leaders of the nation. To increase control over the system and its curriculum, Napoleon established a system of secondary schools under the direction of a central authority. Covering students roughly from age 10-16, these schools provided education to prepare students for higher level schooling.
The heart of the new system was the establishment of thirty lycées, or high schools. Every appellate court district was to have a lycée, and they were to be completely supported, and controlled, by the state. Scholarships were provided, with about one-third going to sons of the military and government, and the rest for the best pupils from the secondary schools. The lycées had a six year term of study. The curriculum included languages, modern literature, science, and all other studies necessary for a "liberal" education.
Napoleon's educational system was intended to provide an educated elite that could help run the country and the military. It was also designed to increase the size of the middle class; a middle class that would be successful and hence non-revolutionary. Like in other periods of history, there was a great emphasis on patriotism in the schools; an emphasis that was to increase during the years of the empire.
The standardisation of the curriculum, provisions for well-stocked libraries, and a desire to provide all of the capable boys with educational opportunity were all admirable goals. Napoléon's accomplishments in French education, like his work on the civil code, are among the greatest of his lasting legacies.
Building
Napoléon wanted to increase the unity of France, and key to that unity was communication and transportation. He built canals that connected Nantes and Brest, the Rhone and the Rhine. He built three great ports: Cherbourg, Brest, and Antwerp. His three roads through the Alps opened transportation between France, Switzerland, and Italy. Napoléon spent 277 million on a system of roads throughout France, and he planted countless trees to protect them from the sun. Of course, his triumphal arches and his extension of the Louvre are among the best known of his building projects that have lasted until today.
Napoléon was a truly remarkable man. His abilities included military, diplomatic and domestic spheres, and this latter area proved to be one of his most important. He once said "It is not as a general that I am governing France: it is because the nation believes that I possess the civil qualities of a ruler." His abilities as an administrator may well have exceeded his military skills, and probably had a longer lasting effect on both France and the world. Napoléon led France and Europe into the 19th century. This was in spite of the relative shortness of his reign. Years later on St. Helena, Napoléon wrote: "If only I had reigned for forty years." Had he done so, he may well have been given the opportunity to turn his considerable administrative talents to projects beyond the borders of France.
Mr. Salmon suggests that Napoléon's success as a general was more than off-set by his alleged failure as a statesman. Without conceding his point on Napoleon as a statesman, I would suggest that his administrative and domestic success may well overshadow both the military and diplomatic spheres in the evaluation of Napoléon's place in history. And in that sphere, his success was overwhelming.
David Markham is the Executive Vice-President and Editor-in-Chief of the International Napoleonic Society and a member of the Napoleonic Association of Great Britain. He has published articles world-wide, and wrote two chapters in the recently released Napoleon: The Final Verdict.
Related
In a recent article in First Empire, John Salmon suggests that while Napoleon was clearly a success as a general, his failure as a statesman largely negated his success on the battlefield, saying "Success as a general is of no use if you cannot put those successes to good use as a Statesman." I will leave to others, for now, the 'defence' of Napoleon as a statesman, pausing only to point out that Napoleon had the unenviable task of trying to match his military victories with victories of diplomacy with adversaries who generally did not acknowledge his legitimacy, and who feared that he would change completely the basic nature of the European political system. But Salmon's suggestion that Napoleon was neither far-sighted or practical is, at the very least, to over-state reality.
Napoléon brought to the task of government exactly that assemblage of qualities which the situation required, an unsurpassed capacity for acquiring technical information in every branch of government, a wealth of administrative inventiveness which has never been equalled, a rare power of driving and draining the energies of man, a beautiful clearness of intellect which enabled him to seize the salient features of any subject, however tough, technical and remote, a soldierly impatience of verbiage in others combined with a serviceable gift of melodramatic eloquence in himself; above all, immense capacity for relevant labour.
Of all our institutions public education is the most important. Everything depends on it, the present and the future. It is essential that the morals and political ideas of the generation which is now growing up should no longer be dependent upon the news of the day or the circumstances of the moment. Above all we must secure unity: we must be able to cast a whole generation in the same mould.
Back to Table of Contents -- First Empire #35
Back to First Empire List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1997 by First Empire.
This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com