Abstract

Napoleon, his military genius, education, far-reaching vision, and the governmental institutions of the empire he created continue to attract the attention and interest of both professional scholars and the general public. Napoleon’s aspiration to global domination, which would presumably have brought peoples of different nationalities together within the empire he established, represents a particularly intriguing phenomenon. Georgia, our homeland, was not excluded from these plans. Following Russia’s anticipated defeat, the emperor intended to launch from Tbilisi his grand military campaign, which was expected ultimately to overthrow British rule in India. Nevertheless, owing to international political and strategic considerations, under the Treaty of Finckenstein of 1807, he recognised Georgia as belonging to Persia.

What type of state was the vast empire created by Napoleon? Although he was a military leader, Napoleon consistently emphasised that all authority derived from the people. He stated: “I was entrusted with supreme power by the decision of the people, and I cannot believe that they still have confidence in the person they chose until my authority has received the approval of the entire nation.” Accordingly, both his appointment as consul for life and his proclamation as emperor were preceded by plebiscites.

Napoleon continually stressed the superiority of civilian authority over military power. Neither during the Consulate nor even under the Empire did an institution resembling a military caste exist that controlled every sphere, from politics to the economy. Nothing in Napoleonic France could be compared with the military-dictatorial regimes of Latin America. Napoleon was a general, commander, and military figure only in wartime and on the battlefield, from the beginning of a campaign until its conclusion. In peacetime, he acted as a statesman and civilian ruler.

The oath Napoleon pronounced when assuming the imperial crown constituted an entire collection of commitments emphasising the limitations placed upon imperial authority and its republican character. Particularly noteworthy are the conclusion of the oath and Napoleon’s official title: “Napoleon Bonaparte, Emperor of the French Republic, by the Grace of God and the Constitution.” Republican principles were also reflected in the anthem of the imperial period, Le Chant du départ (“Song of Departure for War”), whose lyrics glorified republicanism and France—the France that was expected to bring peace and freedom to the world.

Although Napoleon was the universally recognised leader of the nation, he cannot be identified with the classical Eastern despot, who traditionally cultivated an image of remote grandeur and appeared before his subjects as a kind of divine ruler. Napoleon, by contrast, depended entirely on himself—on his own ability to achieve victories and captivate his subjects. At the same time, he depended on the people, their opinions, and their judgement. This explains why, toward the end of the Hundred Days, ordinary Parisians so vigorously opposed his abdication.

Napoleon’s popularity among the population and the sympathy shown toward him by working people are also demonstrated by the fact that, in 1818–1819, protests by ordinary working people took place in France under the slogan: “Down with the Bourbons! Long live the Emperor!” Some participants were even imprisoned for expressing such views.

On the basis of the foregoing, it may be concluded that Napoleon’s government, first as First Consul and later as emperor, cannot, because of its distinctive characteristics, be classified unequivocally either as a dictatorship or as a monarchy. In this respect as well, Napoleon appears as an exceptional and unique phenomenon. It is precisely for this reason that his form of government received a specific designation of its own—Bonapartism.

This type of authority is characterised as personal rule supported by broad sections of the population. It may also be understood as an ideology founded upon a strong and centralised regime, national consensus, the protection of public order and social equality, and the inviolability of the individual and private property.

Keywords: Napoleon Bonaparte; Bonapartism; Napoleonic Empire; political authority; plebiscite.

Ivane Menteshashvili

Abstract