Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > History Book Reviews > Historum Book Discussion
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Historum Book Discussion History Book Discussion Forum


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 9th, 2017, 11:45 AM   #11

Isleifson's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2013
From: Lorraine tudesque
Posts: 3,172

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josefa View Post
@ Isleifson: So, whose view of Napoleon does this image represent in your opinion? That of Jean Tulard or that of Henri Guillemin?

I've read up to 1802 now; Napoleon is about to receive the office of First Consul for life. The book keeps annoying me with quotes for which there is no source given. In so far I have to agree with the review Linschoten linked to in his reply: that's sloppy craftmanship.
The content however is interesting as it details much of the political shifts and intrigues within the governments.

It still has not helped me much in becoming more interested in the person of Napoleon however. I still find him rather boring; so far the book seems to confirm that more than to contradict it.
I don't know who is right.

Anyway my main interest is Ethnology. So this picture is showing how the peasant saw Napoleon : he brouhgt stability after the revolution.

Napoleon merged with Saint Napoléon the warrior.

Figures of Napoleon where put where before you had a Saint.

You could find Napoleon in places which in your country you call an Herrgottswinkel.
Isleifson is offline  
Remove Ads
Old December 9th, 2017, 06:40 PM   #12

Josefa's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Jul 2017
From: Germany
Posts: 330
Blog Entries: 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Isleifson View Post
I don't know who is right.

Anyway my main interest is Ethnology. So this picture is showing how the peasant saw Napoleon : he brouhgt stability after the revolution.

Napoleon merged with Saint Napoléon the warrior.

Figures of Napoleon where put where before you had a Saint.

You could find Napoleon in places which in your country you call an Herrgottswinkel.
So far, Jean Tulard does not pay much attention to the peasants. He briefly mentions that wealthy peasants were in league with merchants and the bourgeoisie ever since the end of the Terreur, for precisely the reason of stability (of landownership, in this case). The rest, I assume, were tranquilized with propaganda (like in the image you posted).

But in order to bring stability, according to Jean Tulard, Napoleon was not necessary. The country had returned to some measure of stability under the Directory already. As a matter of fact, much of the Consulate's successes he actually ascribes to reforms begun under Barras; Napoleon was merely reaping the fruits. I'm not particularly surprised but it is the first time I've actually read it that explicitely.

I have by now read up to the Prussian war. The author clearly isn't a big friend of military history (which already endears him to me). I'm a bit disappointed that he mostly fails to mention what Napoleonic occupation (be it in a friendly manner or not) meant for the countries outside of France. He does cite the numbers for supposed Prussian reparations though. There are some more assumptions that I cannot quite agree with, like, that after 1806 the Grande Armée had lost its character of an army fighting for the "national cause" due to the foreign contingents it now had to integrate. I'm not sure that was the main reason. I guess it's just a little harder to understand for the common soldier that by plundering villages in Prussia or Poland he somehow defended France.

Jean Tulard's book actually makes an interesting contrast to the TV series with Henri Guillemin that Linschoten linked to. Both authors agree on much of what they say about the immense importance of the financial sector in the Napoleonic empire. The people who really ruled were bankers, merchants, fournisseurs, and everything else, imperial crowns and military victories, was merely window-dressing. But while Tulard keeps it there and even claims that more research was needed into the matters of the Bonapartes' finances, Guillemin is acerbic about how Napoleon was mostly interesting in enriching himself.

In some aspects the age of both the book and the series become obvious, I feel.
Josefa is offline  
Old December 11th, 2017, 07:22 PM   #13

Josefa's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Jul 2017
From: Germany
Posts: 330
Blog Entries: 3

Update: After the war of 1807 the author spends several very interesting chapters on describing the internal situation of France and its satellite states, particularly of the "lower classes", including the peasants. He explains that, despite the fact that workers and peasants had factually gotten very little out of Napoleon's regime, approval was still high among them. The farmers saw in Napoleon the guarantee that feudalism wouldn't come back, while workers enjoyed comparatively high wages due to conscription (cynical but effective, I presume: keep the supply of workers low by getting a number of them killed or maimed every year).

The situation in Germany is only briefly mentioned (kingdom of Westphalia), and the situation in Italy, in my opinion, is again seen way too positively, particularly when Jean Tulard claims the Kingdom of Naples enjoyed "a relative independence". Very relative indeed ... At the end of the chapter he does however very clearly state the economic situation that Napoleon's politics had created: the countries outside of France were forced into the place of a colony towards its motherland, providing cheap resources and expected to buy ready-made French products. All competitive industry in the satellite states that might have endangered French supremacy was deliberately destroyed by trade laws and contracts that immensely favoured France.
Josefa is offline  
Old December 14th, 2017, 03:25 AM   #14

Isleifson's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2013
From: Lorraine tudesque
Posts: 3,172

Well yes, that is what I have been trying to say: Napoleon was popular in the country side- 80 % of the population was living in the county side then.

https://www.napoleon.org/magazine/in...eon-mars-2010/

For the translation try this

https://www.deepl.com/translator
Isleifson is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > History Book Reviews > Historum Book Discussion

Tags
jean, myth, napoleon, saviour, tulard



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Napoleon and the Myth of a Merit System pugsville European History 79 November 19th, 2016 07:10 AM
Napoleon: man or myth? Linschoten General History 23 April 3rd, 2015 10:21 AM
Justinian - Saviour or Destroyer? Kirialax Medieval and Byzantine History 162 July 17th, 2010 10:40 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.