Who Is Napoleon Bonaparte First Consul
Napoleon Bonaparte, born on Corsica in 1769, would become one of the world’s most famous generals and leaders. Bonaparte, inspired by enlightenment thinkers like Jacques Rosseau, would become the military commander of Paris and then with his influence, he drafted a new constitution of France in which he erected the consulate. Napoleon would be one of three consuls but as the first consul, Napoleon’s power was much stronger than the other two. Napoleon, as first consul, could elect any person and sway any law. By 1802, he was granted the ability to be first consul for life. Essentially, undoing the effort and reason for the French Revolution, Napoleon Bonaparte had brought back the monarchy to France. As a general Napoleon did bring order back
…show more content…
to a chaotic France and give it a foundation for future successes. Napoleon as a general had the entire country rallied behind him as he gave the peasants the liberties they wished for and brought an end to a bloody era. However, as a ruler it seems that Napoleon Bonaparte had took too much on as he failed over and over again. As a ruler, Bonaparte had failed in several ways. The most damaging ways Bonaparte failed were his inability to enact just and fair law codes (known as the Code Napoleon), his failure to stump Britain with the continental system, and his continuous losses in battle be it the Peninsular War, Russian Campaign, or Battle of Nations. Napoleon was a great general, especially earlier in his career. But as a ruler, Napoleon Bonaparte was a failure to the country of France.
As first consul, Napoleon would have the ability to restructure and enact new law codes, which he did.
These laws would be known as the Code Napoleon. Enacted in 1804, The Code Napoleon as explained in Europe, 1648-1815: From the Old Regime to the Age of Revolution by Robin W. Winks and Thomas E. Kaiser, declared “all men equal before the law without regard to rank and wealth. It extended to all the right to follow the occupation and embrace the religion of their choosing. It gave France the single coherent system of law that the philosophes had demanded….” At first glance the Code Napoleon sounds amazing, but the law codes were definitely misconceiving as they held within them a lot of bad things as well. The Code Napoleon also favored the interests of the state over the individual, so again we can link it back to a monarchy-type rule. Again, going back to the law codes bringing back a monarchy-type rule, the emperor (Napoleon) had full right to appoint judges, dukes, and other high titles. More barbarically, the law codes also allowed for the use of torture in trials, furthermore it gave Napoleon the ability to be judge, jury and executioner if Napoleon did not get his way or the results he desired. By re-instituting monarchy type rule, Bonaparte had undone the efforts of the French Revolution. He may have stabilized the country, but Bonaparte had definitely set the country up again for failure with the Code Napoleon and then again with his failed continental
system.
France’s success for the future heavily relied on its ability to overtake its competition, which was mainly Britain throughout its course. Bonaparte’s attempt to overtake Britain as the powerhouse of Europe was definitely its implementation of the Continental System. The Continental system was meant to regulate the economy of Europe and to build up France’s export trade while crippling Britain’s. The Continental system led to a back and forth between France and Britain which included the enacting of the Berlin Decree and Milan Decree (issued by Napoleon); and Britain requiring neutral vessels to trade with France as well as paying duties to do so. If the Continental System was successful, France would have likely been the biggest and most dominant country in all of Europe, but it did not. Only few French industries benefited from the system, there was a decline in oversees trades and an increased difficulty of obtaining raw materials and Winks and Kaiser state that “…the value of French exports declined by a third between 1805 and 1913.” Meanwhile Britain had prevailed through. Napoleon again had failed as a ruler.
Finally, the biggest blow to Napoleon’s rule was the fact that, as a ruler, he was unsuccessful at accomplishing war victories. Three very important losses that would ruin his rule were the Peninsular War, Russian Campaign, and the Battle of Nations. The Peninsular War would begin as Spain had been claimed by Napoleon and he had placed his brother, Joseph, as king. This would cause an uprising in Madrid and the Peninsular war began. Napoleon, with 300,000 men, would fail to win as he stupidly detached part of his forces to now go invade Russia. Now in Russia, Napoleon would fail again even with 700,000 men at his disposal. The cold winter and stubbornness of Russia was too much for Bonaparte and his men as only a quarter survived. Finally, Napoleon received the definitive blow when he lost the Battle of Nations in 1813 as by this time, explained by winks and Kaiser, “…almost every nation in Europe joined the final coalition against France.”
Napoleon Bonaparte was definitely a great general as it rose him to insane heights within his career. However, as a ruler Bonaparte was not ideal, and it seems he had a broken philosophy when trying to raise France’s status as a country. With his Code Napoleon, Bonaparte failed to bring positive reform to the country. With the Continental System, Bonaparte failed to overtake Britain as the powerhouse of Europe. And with his inability to win wars later on, Bonaparte had doomed himself and the nation. As a Ruler, Napoleon Bonaparte had failed.
3) How did the Industrial Revolution transform western Europe?
The Industrial Revolution would forever change western Europe. The industrial Revolution would start in Britain and it had many factors that lead to it. Those factors included Britain’s Agriculture Revolution (New forms of farming and stock breeding that led to a huge increase in food production) and its rich supply of important materials (coal and iron ore). It was unprecedented in how it changed the landscape within western Europe and it especially skyrocketed Britain to new heights that have never been seen before. If not for the Industrial Revolution, one could assume that most technological advances made to this day would not occur. Our technology derives from the advancements made in western Europe. As I say how it affects us today, it greatly affected western Europe. The Industrial Revolution would bring to western Europe new technology far more advanced than previous technological strides, it would bring western Europe new factories (one could view as the birth of the modern factory), and most importantly, the Industrial Revolution had a Social Impact (Population growth, City transformation, Industrial Middle Class) in western Europe that was revolutionary in its own right. The Industrial Revolution would transform western Europe in that it became the focal point of all advances occurring in the world’s technology and it would also set the standard of what a modern society is to be.
New technology during the Industrial Revolution was abundant. It was a time of technological advancement that has never been seen before and it would transform western Europe into a huge factory supplying the world of its goods. These technological advancements can be seen with James Hargreaves spinning jenny which could produce yarn in greater quantities than ever before or Edmund Cartwright’s power loom which allowed weaving of cloth to catch up with the spinning jenny’s ability to produce yarn. But the most important technological advancement to occur is, without a doubt, James Watt’s steam engine. The steam engine was something that would further improve on Britain’s cotton monopoly and by 1850 (during which Britain’s Industrial Revolution was at its highest peak) the steam engines were producing 500,000 horsepower. But unlike horses, as explained in The Industrial Revolution and Its Impact on European Society, “the steam engine was a tire- less source of power and depended for fuel on a sub- stance—namely, coal—that seemed then to be unlimited in quantity.” The steam engine was not like anything else and it just kept on giving Britain its unending source of power, without seeming (at the time) to have any repercussions as Britain’s abundance of coal looked to be never-ending. The steam engine and all these technological advances would then, of course, lead to the rise of new factories.
With the advancement of the industrial technology, we would also get the birth of the new industrial factories. Initially the product of the new cotton industry, the factory became the main source of organized labor for the new machines and new opportunities created. New opportunities also meant new jobs, but interestingly that wasn’t necessarily a good thing early on as many employees lacked the knowledge and training to operate these new machines. It is here that the industrial factory would become the model for the modern factory, and shape western Europe’s industries. As technology changes, so did factories. Factory owners couldn’t allow their expensive new machines to be used improperly or to not be used at all, so they had forced upon workers regular hours and shifts to keep machines in use and to maintain production. This was new to most people whose lives were mostly agrarian before the industrial revolution. Here, we then get such things as fines for minor infractions like being late because now, time became money. This is where a shift would occur on how work would be done in western Europe and centuries later around the world!
Lastly, the industrial Revolution would transform western Europe with its intense social impact on the area. Vast changes would occur, and it was all due to the Industrial Revolution. These social impacts would include population growth, city growth and the formation of the industrial middle class. With population growth, the rise would be unprecedented. By 1850 the population in Britain alone would rise to 266 million, nearly double of what the population was in 1750! Interestingly however, it was not due to a rise in birth’s but a decline in deaths. With the population changing, cities would change too. Before 1850, cities were centered around churches and commerce. But with manufacturing and industries becoming the powerhouse it did, entrepreneurs would, as explained in The Industrial Revolution and Its Impact on European Society, “locate their manufacturing plants in urban centers where they had ready access to transportation facilities and unemployed people from the country looking for work.” And the social impact then formed the new industrial middle class, who were the area’s lawyers, teachers, government officials and physicians.
The Industrial Revolution was something that would forever change western Europe. It would bring about new technology like the steam engine. It would create new opportunities in factories and bring about modern business goals, ethics, and disciplines. It would then impact the area socially, as it brought in a population rise, transformed the cities and changed the class system with its rise of the industrial middle class. The Industrial Revolution would indeed transform western Europe in that it became the focal point of all advances occurring in the world’s technology and also set the standard of what a modern society is to be
to a chaotic France and give it a foundation for future successes. Napoleon as a general had the entire country rallied behind him as he gave the peasants the liberties they wished for and brought an end to a bloody era. However, as a ruler it seems that Napoleon Bonaparte had took too much on as he failed over and over again. As a ruler, Bonaparte had failed in several ways. The most damaging ways Bonaparte failed were his inability to enact just and fair law codes (known as the Code Napoleon), his failure to stump Britain with the continental system, and his continuous losses in battle be it the Peninsular War, Russian Campaign, or Battle of Nations. Napoleon was a great general, especially earlier in his career. But as a ruler, Napoleon Bonaparte was a failure to the country of France.
As first consul, Napoleon would have the ability to restructure and enact new law codes, which he did.
These laws would be known as the Code Napoleon. Enacted in 1804, The Code Napoleon as explained in Europe, 1648-1815: From the Old Regime to the Age of Revolution by Robin W. Winks and Thomas E. Kaiser, declared “all men equal before the law without regard to rank and wealth. It extended to all the right to follow the occupation and embrace the religion of their choosing. It gave France the single coherent system of law that the philosophes had demanded….” At first glance the Code Napoleon sounds amazing, but the law codes were definitely misconceiving as they held within them a lot of bad things as well. The Code Napoleon also favored the interests of the state over the individual, so again we can link it back to a monarchy-type rule. Again, going back to the law codes bringing back a monarchy-type rule, the emperor (Napoleon) had full right to appoint judges, dukes, and other high titles. More barbarically, the law codes also allowed for the use of torture in trials, furthermore it gave Napoleon the ability to be judge, jury and executioner if Napoleon did not get his way or the results he desired. By re-instituting monarchy type rule, Bonaparte had undone the efforts of the French Revolution. He may have stabilized the country, but Bonaparte had definitely set the country up again for failure with the Code Napoleon and then again with his failed continental
system.
France’s success for the future heavily relied on its ability to overtake its competition, which was mainly Britain throughout its course. Bonaparte’s attempt to overtake Britain as the powerhouse of Europe was definitely its implementation of the Continental System. The Continental system was meant to regulate the economy of Europe and to build up France’s export trade while crippling Britain’s. The Continental system led to a back and forth between France and Britain which included the enacting of the Berlin Decree and Milan Decree (issued by Napoleon); and Britain requiring neutral vessels to trade with France as well as paying duties to do so. If the Continental System was successful, France would have likely been the biggest and most dominant country in all of Europe, but it did not. Only few French industries benefited from the system, there was a decline in oversees trades and an increased difficulty of obtaining raw materials and Winks and Kaiser state that “…the value of French exports declined by a third between 1805 and 1913.” Meanwhile Britain had prevailed through. Napoleon again had failed as a ruler.
Finally, the biggest blow to Napoleon’s rule was the fact that, as a ruler, he was unsuccessful at accomplishing war victories. Three very important losses that would ruin his rule were the Peninsular War, Russian Campaign, and the Battle of Nations. The Peninsular War would begin as Spain had been claimed by Napoleon and he had placed his brother, Joseph, as king. This would cause an uprising in Madrid and the Peninsular war began. Napoleon, with 300,000 men, would fail to win as he stupidly detached part of his forces to now go invade Russia. Now in Russia, Napoleon would fail again even with 700,000 men at his disposal. The cold winter and stubbornness of Russia was too much for Bonaparte and his men as only a quarter survived. Finally, Napoleon received the definitive blow when he lost the Battle of Nations in 1813 as by this time, explained by winks and Kaiser, “…almost every nation in Europe joined the final coalition against France.”
Napoleon Bonaparte was definitely a great general as it rose him to insane heights within his career. However, as a ruler Bonaparte was not ideal, and it seems he had a broken philosophy when trying to raise France’s status as a country. With his Code Napoleon, Bonaparte failed to bring positive reform to the country. With the Continental System, Bonaparte failed to overtake Britain as the powerhouse of Europe. And with his inability to win wars later on, Bonaparte had doomed himself and the nation. As a Ruler, Napoleon Bonaparte had failed.
3) How did the Industrial Revolution transform western Europe?
The Industrial Revolution would forever change western Europe. The industrial Revolution would start in Britain and it had many factors that lead to it. Those factors included Britain’s Agriculture Revolution (New forms of farming and stock breeding that led to a huge increase in food production) and its rich supply of important materials (coal and iron ore). It was unprecedented in how it changed the landscape within western Europe and it especially skyrocketed Britain to new heights that have never been seen before. If not for the Industrial Revolution, one could assume that most technological advances made to this day would not occur. Our technology derives from the advancements made in western Europe. As I say how it affects us today, it greatly affected western Europe. The Industrial Revolution would bring to western Europe new technology far more advanced than previous technological strides, it would bring western Europe new factories (one could view as the birth of the modern factory), and most importantly, the Industrial Revolution had a Social Impact (Population growth, City transformation, Industrial Middle Class) in western Europe that was revolutionary in its own right. The Industrial Revolution would transform western Europe in that it became the focal point of all advances occurring in the world’s technology and it would also set the standard of what a modern society is to be.
New technology during the Industrial Revolution was abundant. It was a time of technological advancement that has never been seen before and it would transform western Europe into a huge factory supplying the world of its goods. These technological advancements can be seen with James Hargreaves spinning jenny which could produce yarn in greater quantities than ever before or Edmund Cartwright’s power loom which allowed weaving of cloth to catch up with the spinning jenny’s ability to produce yarn. But the most important technological advancement to occur is, without a doubt, James Watt’s steam engine. The steam engine was something that would further improve on Britain’s cotton monopoly and by 1850 (during which Britain’s Industrial Revolution was at its highest peak) the steam engines were producing 500,000 horsepower. But unlike horses, as explained in The Industrial Revolution and Its Impact on European Society, “the steam engine was a tire- less source of power and depended for fuel on a sub- stance—namely, coal—that seemed then to be unlimited in quantity.” The steam engine was not like anything else and it just kept on giving Britain its unending source of power, without seeming (at the time) to have any repercussions as Britain’s abundance of coal looked to be never-ending. The steam engine and all these technological advances would then, of course, lead to the rise of new factories.
With the advancement of the industrial technology, we would also get the birth of the new industrial factories. Initially the product of the new cotton industry, the factory became the main source of organized labor for the new machines and new opportunities created. New opportunities also meant new jobs, but interestingly that wasn’t necessarily a good thing early on as many employees lacked the knowledge and training to operate these new machines. It is here that the industrial factory would become the model for the modern factory, and shape western Europe’s industries. As technology changes, so did factories. Factory owners couldn’t allow their expensive new machines to be used improperly or to not be used at all, so they had forced upon workers regular hours and shifts to keep machines in use and to maintain production. This was new to most people whose lives were mostly agrarian before the industrial revolution. Here, we then get such things as fines for minor infractions like being late because now, time became money. This is where a shift would occur on how work would be done in western Europe and centuries later around the world!
Lastly, the industrial Revolution would transform western Europe with its intense social impact on the area. Vast changes would occur, and it was all due to the Industrial Revolution. These social impacts would include population growth, city growth and the formation of the industrial middle class. With population growth, the rise would be unprecedented. By 1850 the population in Britain alone would rise to 266 million, nearly double of what the population was in 1750! Interestingly however, it was not due to a rise in birth’s but a decline in deaths. With the population changing, cities would change too. Before 1850, cities were centered around churches and commerce. But with manufacturing and industries becoming the powerhouse it did, entrepreneurs would, as explained in The Industrial Revolution and Its Impact on European Society, “locate their manufacturing plants in urban centers where they had ready access to transportation facilities and unemployed people from the country looking for work.” And the social impact then formed the new industrial middle class, who were the area’s lawyers, teachers, government officials and physicians.
The Industrial Revolution was something that would forever change western Europe. It would bring about new technology like the steam engine. It would create new opportunities in factories and bring about modern business goals, ethics, and disciplines. It would then impact the area socially, as it brought in a population rise, transformed the cities and changed the class system with its rise of the industrial middle class. The Industrial Revolution would indeed transform western Europe in that it became the focal point of all advances occurring in the world’s technology and also set the standard of what a modern society is to be