Napoleon Police Powers

← Doyle, William. The French Revolution: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc. 2001

Document 1 is describing the manner in which Napoleon ruled over the people of France. The purpose of this document is to show both the pros and cons of Napoleon's rule and in which was he both embodied ideas from the Revolution and strayed back to thinkings from the Old Regime. This document shows how Napoleon went away from the ideas of the French Revolution by forcing an administration system and protecting the ideas of absolutism by ruling authority.

The next way that Napoleon maintained his control was through Repression, to limit any opposition to his regime. Napoleon created "Code Napoleon" to bring uniformity of the law to all of France. This Code was illiberal, restrictive, authoritarian and brought order. Napoleon then banned trade unions and introduced "The Livret". He also introduced harsher Criminal and Penal codes with new courts, tribunals for political offenders, arbitrary imprisonment without trial and house arrest.

In 1793 and 1794, were conditions in France serious enough to require such a violent response by the revolutionary government.The Reign of Terror lasted less than two years, from the execution of Louis XVI in January 1793 to late July 1794.During those eighteen months, more than 20,000 French people were put to death by guillotine.The behavior by the revolutionary French government was not justified because Any society that invents the machine to publicly cut off people’s heads is off base. The action is unjustified because it is barbaric.The reign of terror was not justified because Robespierre’s s Desperate times required desperate measures not justified In a government that says it values liberty, passing a law like the levee en mass is unjust because it requires people to do things they do not want to do wrong in a government that says it values freedom and liberty. The revolutionary government made too many demands on individuals who were right to rebel against the oppressive revolutionary government. speech sounds rational, but he is out of touch. When a government has to “smother” its own citizens in order to eliminate individuals who challenge it, the government is not promoting freedom.To lay the foundations of democracy and the rule of law, rulers need to follow democracy and the rule of law, not the blade of terror. Any society that invents the machine to publicly cut off people’s heads is off base. The action is unjustified because it is barbaric.Nine people

Few humans have ever come as close to ruling over the entirety of Europe as Napoleon Bonaparte did. As the end of the French Revolution drew near, Napoleon Bonaparte did not hesitate long to create policies that kept him in power. With such power, it was certain that Napoleon would use it to influence to people all over Europe. Napoleon’s impact on the people of France and Europe, who he affected through propaganda, his ideas of nationalism and patriotism, and a codification of laws, was a very long-standing and resilient ideology that was mostly prevalent during the French Revolution.

During the French Revolution, the revolutionaries wanted to make a new government that would give the citizens more freedom, liberty, and equality. The Reign of Terror, led by Robespierre, was a period of the French Revolution during which many people were ruthlessly executed by the new government. This period of murder and blood shed started from the execution of Louis XVI in January 1793 to late July 1794 called the Reign of Terror. During those eighteen months, more than 20,000 French people were put to death by guillotine. The behavior by the revolutionaries in the French government was not justified for these three reasons: internal and external threats were not serious, the manipulation of the Committee of Public Safety and Maximilien Robespierre wasn’t for the benefit of the all the French citizen, and the uses of the death machine, the guillotine, was inhumane.

With all the glory and the splendour that some countries may have experienced, never has history seen how only only one man, Napoleon, brought up his country France from its most tormented status, to the very pinnacle of its height in just a few years time. He was a military hero who won splendid land-based battles, which allowed him to dominate most of the European continent. He was a man with ambition, great self-control and calculation, a great strategist, a genius; whatever it was, he was simply the best. But, even though how great this person was, something about how he governed France still floats among people 's minds. Did he abuse his power? Did Napoleon defeat the purpose of the ideals of the French Revolution? After all of his success in his military campaigns, did he gratify the people 's needs regarding their ideals on the French Revolution? This is one of the many controversies that we have to deal with when studying Napoleon and the French Revolution. In this essay, I will discuss my opinion on whether or not was he a destroyer of the ideals of the French Revolution.

The author explained how the French Revolution starts and also how choice made by the royal government affect the old regime which moved the country into different conflicts. For example, in chapter 1 “The

France was experience a great amount of change in the summer of 1793, when the Jacobins succeeded the moderates in the National Convention. With the radical Jacobins in power, the country was in tumult, and a Reign of Terror ensued due to a law of suspects that legalized local revolutionary committees. Because of this, thousands of people were killed by guillotine or other methods. Throughout the summer of 1793, the radical Jacobins’ control of the Committee of Public Safety instituted the Terror which was advantageous in it’s intended purpose, yet it was disadvantageous because of the enemies it created.

French minister Richelieu symbolized absolutism in many ways. With his policy of total subordination of all groups and institutions to the French monarchy, Richelieu worked to break the power of nobility. This is because French nobility’s selfish and independent ways went against the the crown’s goal to centralize the state. To break it Richelieu leveled castles, which were a symbol of feudal independence. He also destroyed aristocratic conspires, with speedy executions. In addition to this Richelieu’s genius is best reflected in the administrative system he established. Extending the use of royal commissioners, known as intendants giving them responsibility for justice, police, and finances in each of Frances 32 generalities or districts.

Napoleon had already been marked as a prominent pig because he had a reputation of getting things his own way. By being active in the debates, he received much attention and notice from the animals. He also garnered support from those who agreed with his views but were unable to express themselves. Thus, he became a representative of these animals.

Not only did Napoleon take control of neighboring countries to France, but he forced his administration, specifically the Napoleonic code, on them as well. When instituting the Napoleonic code, many people rejoiced over the enlightened ideas it spread and freedom it promoted. However, most, if not all of Napoleon’s positive reforms were done so with negative intentions or a counter force in mind. For instance, Napoleon restricted all information in and out of France that viewed him negatively or could potentially obstruct the submissive society he built. In fact, plays, newspapers, and books were censored, which kept his citizens in the dark. The deceit continued when Napoleon promised freedom for all people, but went back on his word once it was no longer convenient for him. For example, Napoleon was facing many

The French desired a representative government, but Napoleon truly believed that the French needed some sort of monarchy. So Napoleon decided to bring forth a monarchy that would be more efficient, and more powerful than any other Monarchy created in the “Ancien Regime”. So with this, he decided to completely undermine the French, everything they fought for in the early Revolution, would be torn to pieces, and the Equality that they wished upon would no longer be. So do I think Napoleon brought forth Enlightenment, no I don’t. I am sure the French were disappointed by this.

The French Revolution began as an expression of rebellion against centuries of absolute rule in France. After an interim of experimental liberalism under the rule of Jacobins and Girondins and then the infamous reign of terror, the people of French were drawn to a man who promised them a return to stability, and  honor through the expansion of empire. France and it’s people had long yearned for this sens eof honour, it had seemed, and could finally sens eit in a lasting rpesence under the rule of their prodigious, unbeatable general, Napoleon Bonaparte. He would soon take the reigns of civil government as well and become yet another Absolutist ruler, yet this

Napoleon Bonaparte established an authoritarian empire, and declared himself emperor. While this seems as far from a republic as possible, Bonaparte asserted many of the recent, liberal socioeconomic ideals of France into his policies. When the Code was published in 1804, it outlined the rights to freedom of religion, equality before law, rights of ownership, and abolition of feudalism. It writes, “Private persons have the free disposition of the property belonging to them, subject to the modifications established by the laws” (The Civil Code), and this absolute right to property benefitted peasant landowners greatly. Under the Civil Code, peasants reclaimed land and property that were under the possession of clergymen and nobility. Another principal idea of the Code was that all people would be equal before the law. All had a chance to improve their social status and gain wealth. As it stated in the first book, “Every Frenchman shall enjoy civil rights” (The Civil Code). These reforms concerning equality before the law were enjoyed tremendously by those living in lower classes during the Napoleonic era. However, despite these improved qualities in the Civil Code, there were elements that contrasted the ideals of the French Revolution as well. For example, the rights of women took a step back under Bonaparte’s policies. Under the chapter of marriage, it states that the wife owes “obedience to her husband” under Article 213 (The Civil Code). Generally, women would need the authorization and guidance of a husband or father in order to participate in the economy with trade or property care. During the Reign of Terror, discrimination against women had begun again, and was established firmly under the Civil Code (Bulliet, et al. 557). Freedom of press was