Commander

Could revolutiary France have withstood the various internal and external threats without Napoleon playing any role in it? How would recent history be different?

cptJACK

there would not have been a revolution without Napoleon.

Nikd

Sorry, but i will not agree with that, the French Revolution was started from the suppressed and hungry people of Paris add and a weak King with a Woman that is off - time and off-space plus that many Frech were in U.S. during the revolution and influenced.
Napoleon clever expolited the situation (he became popular after the victory in Toulon) plus the anarchy of the times he raised quickly to the ranks of the French army.
Napoleon "ended" in one way the French revolution by giving the country (for some years) a stable goverment, maybe Napoleon greatest contribution was that due his conquests the "message" of the French revolution spread through Europe and was a spark for later revolutions (like the Greek in 1821).

Professor Phantom

I agree with this statement, the oppressed of France started the Revolution in their quest for freedom. Napolean was a result of the Revolution and took advantage for his chance to rule.

UberCryxic

It's the other way around...there wouldn't have been a Napoleon without the Revolution.

Monsieur Stark

That's much better! The Revolution provided Napoleon with the opportunity to achieve. A man's brilliance doesn't matte if he's not given an opportunity. The Revolution was his opportunity, and he rose to the occassion.

Charlson

Well...he did turn the Italian theatre of war in France's favour, but the pivotal battles that supposedly saved the revolution were all in the northern part of Europe- Valmy, Jemappes, Fleurus etc

But on the other hand, Napoleon did have some significant role in the Siege of Toulon, and the 'Whiff of Grapeshots' episode....

How significant are those interventions on the revolution???

Lawnmowerman

Wasn't he instremental in the defence of the parliment against a Bourbon uprising in Paris. It was his positioning of the cannons and command of the men which enabled the fledgling parlement to survive and it was from this incedent that he was awarded his Italian command.

sylla1

France had still a good army and some excellent generals; the war of the First Coalition would have presumably lasted some more years, but on the long run the inevitable friction between its main members would have finished it.

The post-war borders of France would have been probably similar or a little larger than the ante-bellum status.

No expedition against Egypt; the Ottomans would have been probably utterly busy fighting more effectively against Russia.

Austria would have had time to consolidate her influence in both the German & the Italian states; the unification of both nations would have been lengthy delayed.

Spain & Portugal would have been not occupied and their colonies in North & South America (including Louisiana) would have been theirs a bit longer.

In all likelihood the expansionism of the US would have been lengthy delayed, or even prevented at all.

In France proper, the political situation would have in all likelihood tended to an equilibrium, probably analogous to the eventual III Republic; the Bourbons would have probably never been called back.

Britain would have still been the uncontested ruler of the Seas, would have probably conquered the French colonies and would have opposed France until a greater danger (let say Russia) appeared.

Edratman

This one goes either way.

There was an organized slave rebellion in St. Dominigue, now Haiti, in 1791 that was inspired by the French revolution itself. This rebellion lasted 12 years, with Britian getting involved, mainly as an anti-French effort. The British forces were decimated by yellow fever and withdrew from conflict.

In 1802 Napolean sent his brother-in-law, General LeClerc with 20, 000 French troops to the island to restore slavery. (So much for liberte, egalite, fraternite!) Anyway, these French troops were also ravaged by disease, most likely yellow fever, and the forces of the rebellion defeated the French in 1803, now led by Rochembeau.

This was the point where Napolean lost interest in the New World and sold the Louisiana territory, and it is entirely possible that anyone else at the helm would have done the same. The slave rebellion was inspired by the French revolution, Napolean had very little to do with Haiti and the circumstances were pretty much the same as what any other leader would have faced.