French Revolution, Points Test 16 - The Control of the Grand Empire

Question 1

What were Napoleon’s main aims in organising the empire?

Answer 1

• Napoleon wanted his ‘Grand Empire’ to share the French experience.
• This meant destroying privilege, applying Napoleonic legal codes and concentrating power in hands of efficient, centralising administration.
• Wherever Empire was established, there followed Imperial bureaucracy of prefects, sub-prefects, tax-collectors, customs officers, police commissaries and gendarmes.

Question 2

How was the empire differentiated in terms of ‘greater France’ and other imperial territories?

Answer 2

• In territories that became part of greater France (Belgium, German territories west of Rhine, Piedmont, Ligurian Republic, Nice and Savoy), départements carved out and administration fully integrated into a system centred on Paris.
• Elsewhere, in those territories that were not under direct French control, systems more varied, but the idea mimicked France’s administration with a council of state and a prefectural structure.
• Furthermore, these satellites adopted the French model of public finance, with a restructuring of the fiscal administration, and the introduction of budgeting and accounting.

Question 3

Who did Napoleon recruit to help administer the empire in the imperial provinces?

Answer 3

• Establishing French-style administrative institutions across empire depended on finding men to make them function.
• Napoleon called on mixture of men from incorporated territories, given a stake in the regime, and professional French soldiers (many who gained experience in France during rev.).
• These imperial administrators varied in quality.
• Some honest and capable, some speculating, corrupt and privately motivated.
• Occasionally, Napoleon deliberately appointed men who had been disgraced in Paris, to remove them.
• For most part, empire effectively run.

Question 4

How effectively was the empire policed?

Answer 4

• A gendarmerie set up in areas where French extended imperial rule.
• This reinforced power of central government in even remotest parts of empire.
• This was essential not only to establish control over those opposed to French rule, but for policing of lawless areas, such as Apennine regions of Italy and parts of Rhineland, centres of smuggling and banditry.
• Gendarmeries proved effective in directly-controlled territories, but in south Italy and north German coast (insecure regions of empire) concept never accepted.

Question 5

Why did Napoleonic attempts to police the empire often backfire?

Answer 5

• Local people resented paramilitary police force, regarding it as oppressive and unnecessary.
• All attempts to create one in Spain failed.
• There, French army relied upon to maintain control.

Question 6

How centralised was the empire?

Answer 6

• Despite some devolution of authority to satellites, French administration highly centralised.
• Napoleon insisted rulers should report directly and refer all major decisions to him.
• Documents ranging from minutes of councils of state to copies of budgetary statements all dispatched to Paris.
• If Napoleon didn’t read all these himself, they were perused by Ministers.
• This sometimes caused substantial delays when authorisation sought.

Question 7

What opportunities did the empire provide for the bourgeoisie of the satellites?

Answer 7

• Occasionally, difficult to find local men with necessary skills.
• There were plenty of opportunities for educated, middle-class officials living in satellite states.
• Ending of feudal restriction/opportunity for merit created pool of administrators to staff bureaucratic state.
• Positions limited only by French insistence that more sensitive posts (highest offices in justice and finance) be reserved for Frenchmen.
• Prestigious role of prefect filled by men from variety of states, rarely appointed as administrators in their own region.
• The corps therefore became more international, as well as professional.

Question 8

How well did Napoleonic family run their respective parts of the empire?

Answer 8

• In Westphalia, Jerome fulfilled his brother’s wishes by establishing the Code Napoleon, abolishing feudalism and introducing religious toleration into his territories.
• His older brother Joseph much less successful in introducing reforms and establishing effective administration, both in his initial posting in Naples, where his attempted introduction of the Code met resistance, and in Spain, where French never established control.
• Louis, in Holland, proved too independent for Napoleon, failing to introduce conscription and allowing some self-government.
• He was forced to abdicate in 1810.
• Eugéne Beauharnais proved a more reliable viceroy in Italy.
• Here, feudalism disappeared, Code brought in, education extended and French legal system operated reasonably effectively.

Question 9

How effective was the imperial bureaucracy?

Answer 9

• For the most part, the French imperial administrative system was a well-oiled bureaucratic machine.
• French passion for regulation may have smothered independent initiative and stifled aspirations of some of empire’s subject peoples.
• However, to Napoleon and his ministers, standardisation a virtue.

Question 10

What was the ‘inner empire’?

Answer 10

• The historian Michael Broers has made a useful distinction between the ‘inner’ and ‘outer’ empire.
• The ‘inner’ empire, consisting of the ‘enlarged France’ (pays réunis) and the territories (pays allies) immediately beyond this (Belgium, Netherlands, Rhineland, most of western Germany, Switzerland and North Italy) was well-integrated, efficiently administered and largely obedient.
• Here, the policy of raillement created a loyal administrative class.

Question 11

What was the ‘outer empire’?

Answer 11

• The ‘outer’ empire, comprising the satellite states and conquered territories, was much less enthusiastic about French rule.
• Administrative control here rested on insecure alliance of local collaborators and French professionals, both of whom unpopular with subjects.

Question 12

What was the economic organisation of the imperial economy?

Answer 12

• The policy of ‘France First’ the watchword of imperial economics.
• Imperial states paid heavily for privilege of ‘French protection’.
• Removal of privilege, dismantling of guild system and of internal customs barriers, combined with rigorous tax-collection system, were all intended (at least in part) to maximise the amount of revenue to squeeze out of empire.
• Improved efficiencies raised tax revenue in Italy by 50% between 1805 and 1811.
• Taxes also simplified. In Naples over 100 different taxes replaced by single one on land and industry.
• In Holland, new uniform tax brought in and commercial profits taxed at lower rate than agricultural profits, to ensure the support of the wealthier merchants.

Question 13

Explain Imperial ‘Donations’ and what were the advantages/disadvantages of the system?

Answer 13

• The Empire also provided booty – sometimes land, taken from church and disposed sovereigns – to be used for donations.
• In attempt to create solid base of supporters, regime used this system from 1806.
• This consisted of giving individual an endowment, namely the right to collect revenue from land seized in Italian, German or Polish territories and taken under empire’s direct control.
• This endowment could be passed on through the male line, but could not be sold or given to anyone else without the Emperor’s permission.
• All recipients had to swear an oath of loyalty to the Emperor.
• The holders of the donation was not encouraged to live on his lands and these donations did not carry any judicial or political rights.
• Donations were particularly used in Poland and Westphalia, which jointly supplied 25%.
• While gifting of land revenues served useful social purpose, in reduced incomes of states themselves.
• It has been estimated Duchy of Warsaw lost 20% of its revenue this way.
• War made the successful financial management of the satellite states more difficult.
• However, Napoleon more concerned about their contributions to the French budget than to their own self-sufficiency.

Question 14

How were different economies of the French Empire treated?

Answer 14

• The economies of states comprising the empire developed in different ways.
• Those states under direct french control enjoyed preferential treatment.
• Satellites primarily regarded as suppliers of raw materials and food for France, and were not allowed to develop manufacturing industries that competed with French producers.
• This different became acute after the establishment of the continental system throughout the empire, following the Berlin Decree of 1806 and the Milan Decree of 1807.
• France and annexed territories of Belgium, the Rhineland and parts of Italy could circulate goods across the rest of the empire, while satellite states had to pay increasingly prohibitive tariffs on their own exports to France and to each other.
• Napoleon hoped french industries would fill gap left by absence of British goods.
• Preferential trade zone parts of ‘inner’ empire did well.
• Belgium able to take advantage of ban on British cotton and their textile industry boomed.
• Although manufacturers unable to import latest British technology.
• Mining did well in the Rhineland, and formation of Confederation of Rhine helped integrate economies of west german states, creating more cohesive economic unit.
• However, non-french manufacturing centres of Europe suffered.
• Silk Industry of Lombardy and Piedmont rapidly declined as all raw silk sent to Lyons.
• In areas where commerce and manufacturing critical to local economy, results catastrophic.
• Grand Duchy of Berg and the ligurian republic, hard hit.
• Berg textiles couldn’t compete with Rhineland.
• Genoa lost trade to Nice.

Question 15

How was agriculture affected across the empire under Napoleon?

Answer 15

• Agriculture less affected by Napoleonic policies.
• Italy, for eg., viewed as breadbasket of the empire.
• Almost all of its rice crop went to France.
• In areas where larger-scale commercial agriculture developed, profits could be made, but Napoleonic policies made much less difference to small-scale subsistence farmers.
• Indeed, gap between more prosperous north of Italy (where capitalist agriculture developing) and more traditional, poorer south, widened.
• Italian economy had suffered from localised markets and political fragmentation for centuries, and the french empire did, at least, create a single market in the Kingdom of Italy.

Question 16

Why, by 1810-1811, was the imperial economy suffering?

Answer 16

• By 1810-1811, french economic policies, including the blockade and tariff system, having a detrimental effect throughout empire.
• This was because the absence of overseas trade meant that manufactured goods had to be sold within continental Europe and there were insufficient markets, given that urban centres were suffering over the loss of their own industrial capacity and crippled by heavy taxation.
• Over-production brought a collapse in prices and the slump was aggravated by a bad harvest.

Question 17

How far could the empire’s woes be blamed on Napoleon?

Answer 17

• Napoleon’s policies cannot be blamed for all of the Empire’s economic troubles.
• Other factors, particularly British industrial supremacy, had already challenged continental Europe before the rise of napoleon.
• Furthermore, since Europe still primarily a rural/agricultural economic area with localised markets and only small-scale industrial development, the French policies were not felt everywhere.
• Nevertheless, in some areas, the Napoleonic empire brought a constant financial drain coupled with disruption to local trade patterns, which produced considerable discontent.

Question 18

What were Napoleon’s social policies with regards to the empire?

Answer 18

• In early years of Napoleonic rule, newly acquired territories underwent same reforms as those introduced within the original départements of France.
• Until 1808, fairly consistent policy of spreading French cultural values throughout the empire.
• Historian Michael Broers referred to Napoleonic desire to change ‘the character of European civilisation itself.’
• The french believed in superiority of ‘enlightened principles’ they brought and wherever they went, so too did revolutionary ideas of liberty and equality – all suitably adapted to imperial rule.
• After 1808, policies became less consistent.
• Pressures on the Empire forced more compromise.

Question 19

How did Napoleon alter the church in parts of his empire and how was this received?

Answer 19

• The application of the Concordat in 1801 brought end to the secular privileges of the church and imposed religious toleration.
• Everywhere, church lands seized and monasteries abolished.
• Within ending of tithe, parish priests became civil servants and saints’ days and religious festivals disappeared.
• Such changes not unopposed.
• While the ‘reforms’ of Concordat welcomed by more secular elements of society, such as Rhineland businessmen and industrialists, they inspired peasant risings in Spain in 1808 and various popular disturbances in 1809, following Napoleon’s seizure of the Pope.
• Indeed, reforms also challenged some deeply held values, particularly in strongly catholic areas, such as of southern Italy.

Question 20

What was Napoleon’s imperial policy towards Jews in Europe?

Answer 20

• The issue of Jewish Tolerance also provoked resistance.
• By Imperial Edict of March 1800, Jewish Worship organised through central Jewish governing body in Paris and a synagogue in each département that contained a Jewish community.
• However, attempt to impose French order on the Jewish communities outside those under direct French rule met with resistance.
• This was both from some European Jews who resented such measures as an attack on their faith, and from those who opposed Jewish emancipation.
• In 1808, the Grand Duchy of Warsaw suspended Jewish Toleration for ten years.
• In Germany the degree of Jewish emancipation depended on the degree of French control; Bavaria granted no rights until 1813.
• The spread of empire also brought attack on privilege.

Question 21

How far was Feudalism destroyed by the Napoleonic empire in Europe?

Answer 21

• Until 1808, seigneurialism and feudal rights challenged wherever French established control.
• Fiscal structures harmonised and tax exemptions disappeared.
• Special legal rights, such as seigneurial courts, swept away and the Civil Code was imposed, giving all societies under French rule the same laws and structures provided legal equality.
• ‘Nobility’ didn’t fully disappear.
• The regime saw ‘landowners’ as important agents of social stability.
• Many of noble class were given (or allowed to retain) positions of power and influence in local government of imperial states.
• However, ‘trappings’ of their positions disappeared.
• In many areas this wasn’t difficult to accomplish, but in some (traditional kingdom of Naples, some German states) this harder to eradicate entrenched social systems.

Question 22

How did Napoleon deal with serfdom?

Answer 22

• Serfdom (system under which peasants masters’ property) had already been abolished in most of western Europe before Napoleon, but remained in eastern Europe.
• It also continued in Prussia until 1807, Austria until 1848, and Russia to 1861.
• Grand Duchy of Warsaw abolished it in 1807, and attempt to give Poles constitution on French model.
• However, this never entirely successful, and imperial regime made rather less effort to enforce the Civil Code after 1808.
• This was because loyalty and readiness to supply soldiers became more important than social reform for Napoleon.
• Although no attempt to reimpose serfdom after Napoleon’s fall, regime ultimately failed to change social structure of much of rural Europe.

Question 23

How did conscription affect the empire?

Answer 23

• The empire also brought the spread of military conscription.
• Military demands could provoke peasant hostility and rebellion.
• After 1808 there was growing discontent in the more rural and less-developed areas of Spain, the German Tyrol and Naples, Emilia-Romagna and the Veneto in Italy.
• In 1806, Grand Duchy of Berg with population of 50,000 had to provide 5,000 soldiers for the Grande Armée.
• In same year, 600,000 men from Westphalia, with pop. Of 2 million, were called up.
• 38,000 of these killed or wounded.
• Furthermore, since french lived off the land, peasant families living near the routes of marching armies had to cope with the destruction of their crops, the killing of animals and soldiers commandeering their farm buildings and even their homes for shelter.

Question 24

What was the basis for conscription across the empire and how did it spread across the empire, in terms of being implemented?

Answer 24

• The basis for conscription was Jourdan’s Law of 1798.
• This required the registration of all men of 18-40 years (although over 30s not actually called up).
• Napoleon continued and ‘exported’ system.
• In territories annexed to France, French administrators introduced to oversee conscription.
• In Satellite kingdoms decrees on conscription issued on similar terms.
• Conscription instituted in Italy in 1802.
• It was enshrined in Constitution of Westphalia when state established in 1807.

Question 25

What were the terms of conscription for solders in the empire?

Answer 25

• In theory soldiers were eligible for discharge after five years, but this rarely happened, except for medical reasons.
• It has been estimated that around 25% of conscripts evaded service in 1804.
• This figure fallen to under 10% by 1813 when conscription more harshly enforced, men as young as 15 might be enlisted.

Question 26

Who were the main winners and losers of Napoleon’s imperial rule?

Answer 26

• The main rewards of Napoleonic rule went to those established on social hierarchy already, or with wealth to exploit them.
• The ambitious middle classes and members of the military could do well, though they faced more bureaucratic regulation and lack of respect for indigenous cultures.
• However, for the common people (whether urban or rural), whatever ‘reforms’ instituted, they were still under ‘foreign’ domination and subject to a system of rule in which they had little choice.
• So while opportunities opened up for some, for others, life must have often seemed worse, rather than better.