Napolean
In the eighteenth century, there was considerable diversity and disagreement among those known as “philosophers,” in particular such individuals as Voltiare, Montesquieu, Rousseau, and the Encyclopedists, especially Diderot, and those who stood in the “enlightened” tradition of the period, such as Hume, Lessing, Kant, and the economic theorists such as the physiocrats and Adam Smith. What they shared, however, was a critical attitude toward traditional religion and an agreement about the unenlightened character of the ancient regimes of Europe, with the corresponding need for reform of the state so that it could become an agency for progress. Finally, they had a profound confidence in natural law as something that could be understood and applied through science and reason, (Allen, 132-134; Doyle 49-55).One particular aspect of the Enlightenment was that of enlightened despotism. Among the many examples of “enlightened” rulers of Europe, the best include Joseph II of Austria, Frederick II of Prussia, and Catherine II of Russia; rulers that would utilize their power to impose the rational reforms and ideals of the enlightenment. And the philosophers, of course, considered themselves to be the proper people to advise these enli . . .
However, Napoleon’s motivation was not philosophical, but pragmatic; if a policy strengthened France, then it strengthened him. Nevertheless, Napoleon was not idealistic, but rather was pragmatic, and his first priority was always to his power, influence, and ambition to which all other philosophic ideologies were sacrificed. In the end, Napoleon’s domestic programs, especially the Code Napoleon, could be considered “enlightened”. In his controversial victory, Napoleon took Moscow, but Czar Alexander I simply retreated and waited for the Russian winter to set in. Voltaire and other French thinkers of the Enlightenment had, in fact, expressed a desire to get rid of the old authoritarianism, which was based on feudal and religious traditions, but their idealistic agenda was to replace the old regime with an enlightened despot. What resulted was that for the sake of the Rights of Man, the rights of individuals could be trampled on. He took the French back to what they probably wanted at the time, which was a friendly, stable and benevolent monarchy, or at least it gave the appearance of being benevolent, (Lyons 35-42). Napoleon set out on his final campaign to rewrite history, justify his actions, and leave his indelible mark. What the philosophers of the Enlightenment had envisioned, however, and the ultimate outcome were two very different things. Napoleon felt that he embodied the spirit of the Revolution through his rule. Careers were ostensibly open to talent, which meant no more hereditary privileges, although it must be said that Napoleon recognized the foundational importance of the old regime’s nobility and, himself, made use of this by establishing a new nobility with familiar faces. He defeated Austria at Austerlitz, took Berlin in the twin battles of Jena and Auerstadt, and invaded Spain in the Peninsular War. The result of which was the Reign of Terror, complete political chaos, social anarchy, mob rule, and, finally, the supposed restoration of order through Napoleon in 1799, (Marshal, 18). He had no patience, however, with those who demanded greater liberty. There is much about the Consulate and Napoleon’s reign from 1804 to 1815 to support this view.
Common topics in this essay:
French Revolution, Napoleon Napoleon, Code Napoleon, Consulate Napoleons, Ironically French, Adam Smith, Palmer Colton, Gallican Church, France Napoleon, Reign Terror, french revolution, enlightened despots, enlightenment ideals, liberty equality fraternity, liberty equality, religious toleration, napoleon napoleon, codified laws, equality fraternity, napoleon instituted, fulfillment enlightenment ideals, napoleon codified laws, fulfillment enlightenment, |
Acceptance Essays
