English Caesar Napoleon

7/28/2019 English Caesar Napoleon

1/7

1

In the name of function Caesars office was to set the state in order again,[2]In a

paradoxical situation Napoleon receives most acclaim (apart from in the military) for his work in

creating efficient governmental systems. Caesar does not, though he is not without

accomplishment or ideas, there is much evidence that both men set about rebuilding their nations

and it is true to say that a large part of their image was consolidated while in government. They

would become the best example of peoples monarchs of peoples empires, not a tyrannical

establishment but a glorious expansion of liberty becoming the ultimate leader figure unifying

the nation under new ideals after the disunion of a revolutionary age.

The institutions of the republican years would therefore become great symbols of the

efficiency of the imperial state. This would culminate in their celebrated legacies that would

become synonymous with Emperor, unifying the people and the military through politics to

consolidate power in government.

Instituiile din anii republicii ar deveni , prin urmare, mari simboluri ale eficienei statului

imperial. Acest lucru ar culmina cu motenirile celebre devenite sinonim cu mpratul, unirea

poporului i consolidarea puterii n guvern prin politic.

The transitional period began before Napoleon and Caesar came to power as both would

create new government through previous governments already existing institutions and

practices. Caesar himself never had to invent new institutions as age old ones were still

workable. Revolutionary France however needed new institutions for a new governmental

structure and though the Directory had began the foundations for reforming the financial and

administrative institutions it was unpopular and by no means efficient.

Perioada de tranziie n ambele situaii a nceput nainte ca Napoleon i Caesar s vin la

putere ca cei doi s creeze un nou stil de guvernare bazat pe instituiile i practicile guvernrilor

anterioare. n cazul Franei motivele care au determinat declanarea revoluiei s-au cristalizat

nc din perioada de nceput a modernismului.

Caesar, de exemplu, nu a fost nevoit s inaugureze noi instituii dac cele vechi erau

funcionale ns Frana revoluionar necesita schimbriavnd n vedere c structura societii

era aceeai ca n Evul Mediu i cu toate c Directoratul ncepea s pune bazele unor reforme

financiare i administrative aceste aciuni au fost ineficiente.
http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftn2http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftn2http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftn2http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftn2


2/7

2

The inefficiency of the previous governments was, like the revolutionary situations,

similar. To begin with Republican Rome had suffered a social rupture resulting in a clique

dominating government as discussed in the last chapter. Not only did this disenfranchise the

people but it also led to inefficient government.

The expansion allowed the aristocrats to maintain their position; but the republican set-

up was suitable only for a city-state and was not effective enough to govern the growing empire.

The people needed a voice, the colonies needed a voice, other Italian states even needed a voice,

and all needed an expanded government administration in order to achieve efficient rule rather

than the short term Rome-centric governance of the Republic.

The conflict between people and clique ruptured into the provinces and fermented further

social strife, strong government was therefore lacking and badly needed. Revolutionary Francearrived in the same situation though by different means, firstly it had paradoxically replaced an

old clique with a new one by the time of the Directory which was a compromise of the

conflicting factions.

This did not solve the dissenting problems and the government became even more

inefficient as there was no strong executive power and different factions continued to strive

against the establishment. In both cases therefore we see the people, and even many of the

elites striving against the established government held onto by a clique who refused to give uppower. They were inefficient due to misrepresentation, lack of reform and control causing chaos

and anger in the divided nations. This paired with expansion, a primary cause of inefficient

government, caused more friction as both nations required strong government at home to govern

effectively abroad.

Imperial history lies in a long social development by which the empire lasts its

dependence on precisely those republican institutions.[5]-only for it to be completed by his heir

Augustus in consolidating the Caesar figure in government.

Napoleon, combining the roles of Caesar and Augustus, restored order and built a new

government and system that slowly transformed into empire under his control, yet still like

Augustus and Caesar purporting republican principles. Caesar and Napoleon both came to power

in this context to fill the vacuum that had been created by political and social upheaval.


3/7

3

Napoleon, combinnd stilul de conducere al lui Iulius Caesar cu cel al lui Augustus a

reinstaurat ordinea i a reuit s construiasc un nou govern i un sistem care ncetul cu ncetul a

transformat Frana ntr-un imperiu sub controlul su pstrnd totui principiile celor doi amintii

anterior.

To begin with both reconciled divided nations; Caesar was merciful to his enemies

ensuring that all were reconciled within his regime and though many of the ruling class still felt

disaffected, many prominent Romans supported his regime encouraged by his clemency.

Napoleon mirrored this by inviting many of the pre-Revolution elites, the migrs, to return in an

attempt to reconcile old and new France by uniting all factions under him.

Ceea ce mai preluat Napoleon de la Caesar este idea reconcilierii. Caesar manifesta o

anumit clemen fa de dumanii si i fa de popoarele cucerite cu scopul de a se asigura c

toi sunt de accord cu regimul su i cu toate c unii patricieni erau nemulumii cei mai muli

oameni i susineau iniiativele tocmai datoritaceste indulgene.

Aceast atitudine a lui Caesar s-a reflectat n comportamentul lui Napoleon prin invitarea

elitelor pre-revoluionare i a emigranilor s se ntoarc n ar pentru a unifica poporul sub

conducerea sa.

Caesar and Napoleon were therefore attempting to represent the interests of the nation as a

whole. They rallied much support as despite the violent coups that brought them to power,people wanted to see the regimes succeed after years of civil strife and disorder. With most of the

nation now reconciled Caesar and Napoleon could begin the reconstruction and ordering of the

nation.

Caesar i de asemenea Napoleon ncearc s reprezinte interesele naiunii ca un ntreg. n

ciuda loviturilor de stat puternice care i-au adus la putere au reuit s beneficieze de un grad

ridicat de putere tocmai pentru c oamenii i doreau linite dup ani de tulburri i conflicte

civile.

The structure of the two regimes was very similar as Napoleon and his collaborators

copied the Roman Republican system symbolically drawing the key names of institutions from

Republican Rome. Napoleon later transformed it into empire and like Rome used the same

Republican institutions to govern efficiently;


4/7

4

Structura celor dou regimuri a fost att de asemntoare nct ne putem nchipui c

Napoleon i subordonaii si au copiat sistemul republican roman printr-un desen n care au

reprezentat grafic toate instituiile cheie ale Romei. Ulterior, Bonaparte a transforman republica

ntr-un imperius pstrnd aceai structuri pentru a guverna eficient, urmnd ndeaproape modelul

evoluiei romane.

Caesar did not need to build a new system but new government. The Roman

Republic and French Consulate both consisted of a Senate to discuss and advise on

legislature as well as elected institutions, the popular assemblies and the national lists

respectively. In Rome the popular assemblies would elect magistrates and pass legislation

but in the Consulate those elected to the national lists were chosen for placement in the

Legislative Assembly which then voted in legislation.

The people were represented in government in Rome by the Tribunes and in the

Consulate by the Tribunate (chosen from national lists). In the Consulate their power was

limited to debate but in Rome they had the enormous power of veto over any proposed laws

by magistrates, even the Consuls. Despite the blunted democratic element to the Consulate

(which may say something about Napoleons aims) both men proceeded to set up a

structure that created strong government. In both cases democracy was crushed behind a

faade of republic and the responsibility of government was tied together in one man, but

at the same time it became more efficient for ruling an expansive empire and paradoxically

to champion the rights of the people, as actions in their rule show. Caesar won dictatorship

after the Civil War with the senate granting him the combined the roles of Consul, Aedile,

Pontifex Maximus and Praetor in monarchical fashion, as an Imperator. Napoleon

preserved a fiction of Republican forms, while retaining the real power himself. This

occurred after a senatus consultum in 1801 allowed him to bypass and override the

legislative chambers, thereby establishing him as dictator. Caesar took power away from

the popular assemblies by appointing magistrates rather than them being elected. Napoleon

later did the same by appointing the Prefects an addition that Augustus had added to

Rome. Napoleon went on from this to forge the French Empire, Caesar would not take the

next step (indeed he may not have intended it) and Augustus would complete that task. The

result in both situations was however was the same, an empire based upon republican

values (or at least purporting them) with similar structures inspired by the role Caesar

defined as dictator. There was no direct democracy in the French or Roman empires but

the people became represented by the peoples leaders rather than a politics or party, this

was personified in the Emperor or Caesar.


5/7

5

Caesar and Napoleons rule in government encompassed rebuilding the nation, as well as

completing the aims of restoring order and their nations to rights as Napoleon put it to restore

the glory of France.

[6]As gifted administrators both men were extremely successful in achieving efficient

government and consolidating the revolutionary ideas of the era.

Both men began this process by centralising power; Caesar was the first Roman statesmen to

have political authority bound not to the city-state but the empire itself. He increased the number

of magistrates, to govern the provinces more efficiently, redistributed corn more effectively,

forced capitalists to invest in land to raise its value, and brought in professionals by offering

citizenship to foreign doctors and artists.

He dominated the senate by increasing its number from 600 to approx. 900, mainly with

provincials, by the time of his death. This gave the provinces a voice in government that not onlyrelieved tensions but further centralised the state into a more efficient imperial system; Caesar

had gathered all the power of the state into his own hands.

Napoleon reorganised the financial state stopping people selling themselves short and made

taxation more efficient by creating The Bank of France to administer finance. He also conducted

municipal reform creating municipal councils for Mayors and their deputies.

Napoleon also reformed the judiciary creating a more hierarchical system and increased

government involvement, causing them to be renamed imperial courts rather than tribunal

courts. These reforms, tied with the creation of a new governing class or nobility, further

centralised the administrative state by adding a social structure. This organised it into an imperial

system and thus in their quest for unity and order both had centralised and created an imperial

state.

They went further by introducing moral codes, Napoleon the Civil Code which later developed

into the Code Napoleon and Caesar a general moral rule to restore civil unity that had

deteriorated in both nations; and they also banned political clubs so that no dissenters could

challenge their regime.

They had thus both moderated in unifying and rebuilding the nations but at the same time they,

particularly Caesar, introduced reform on behalf of the people. Caesar forced employers to

employ freedmen in Latifunda and redistributing land and granting Latin rights to Greeks on

Sicily and some Gallic communities.
http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftn6http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftn6http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftn6


6/7

6

Napoleon pursued a social policy which Ellis argues was more flexible than some have

articulated. It consolidated the careers open to talent of the Revolution and worked enough for

Napoleon to favour the most efficient men in government.

Therefore both maintained the populist line not only in rhetoric but in policy also. It is also

worth noting that both men not only organised the central administration of empires but

were a crucial part of expanding the empires to begin with, taking the imperial image unto

themselves. Linked to this both also advocated colonial policies to expand and solve

problems of population.

They were imperialists and had expanded their nations empire as well as taking a part

in its governmental creation. This was reflected in their rule as they granted kingships and

used the imperial offices as patronage to reward loyalty to the regime. In their governance

and rule they created order and unity in the once divided nations by centralising power on

one man leading to a more centralised state for the future empires.

All of this of course increased their own personal power and the question of whether they

were ambitious tyrants intending supreme personal power or were true saviours must be asked.

It cannot be denied that they enjoyed the trappings of a monarch; Caesar although not named

king certainly enjoyed the power of a monarch and even celebrated it wearing purple and laurel

leaves in reference to his descent from kings.

Caesar however was cut short, and with no evidence of preparations for a hereditary

monarchy or a monarchical system for himself or a successor it seems unlikely he intended to goany further than he did. He defined his position to a crowd shouting King, by stating Not King,

but Caesar,[8]Though Caesar may not have advocated monarchy or one-man rule he set the

precedent for this new kind of monarchy as the peoples leader in government and the very fact

that the debate exists shows them to be the same kind of controversial figure. Particularly as both

crucially arrived at leadership by the same path where Caesars successors only occupied the role

he had defined, Napoleon recreated it.

The role of a military and political leader that represented the interests of the people was

defined by Caesar and rediscovered by Napoleon similarly through the strife of a revolutionaryage. In coming to power via the military and representing the people no matter what their true

aims Caesar set the precedent and Napoleon like Augustus consolidated the role bringing

stronger and more centralised government incorporating the new revolutionary ideas to restore

their nations. By doing so they consolidated this Caesar figure in government which became a

crucial part of the transition from republic to empire. The figure who filled the vacuum that


7/7

7

social strife and chaos had left by supporting the people and unifying and rebuilding the nation to

rule by popular legitimacy with a new kind of empire. This is the Caesar figure in government,

the creator of empire; Caesar himself may have had reforms to enable the Republic to go on

however it would still have become a more centralised empire, ruled by a reformed more

populist republic. The Revolutionaries and Napoleon realised their similarity and emulated it as

seen in the art and imagery of their age, most noticeable the change from republican to imperial

imagery as Napoleon succeeded as the heir of Caesar creating once again an imperial Europe.

[1]Ronald Syme, The Roman Revolution, (New York, 1939), p. 52.

[2]Napoleon Bonaparte, Napoleon on Napoleon, (London, 1992), p. 135, Adding, he must

know himself. - He like Caesar through government became the bridge to construction ratherthan destruction, and thus saved their nations.

[3]Rice T. Holmes, The Roman Empire and its Neighbours, (Oxford, 1928), Preface, p. xi.

[4]F.R Cowell, Cicero and the Roman Republic, (London, 1948), p. 150.

[5]Everitt, p. 249, Caesar wanted to restore the constitution but also wanted to ensure that a

strong executive authority should replace the senatorial government.

[6]Napoleon, p. 137.

[7]Adrian Goldsworthy, Caesar: The Life of a Colossus, (London, 2006), p. 606.

[8]It is worth noting that many French were more willing to accept monarchy than the Romans

who were had not seen a monarchy for hundreds of years even under Augustus republican values

had to be purported.
http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref1http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref1http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref2http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref2http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref3http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref3http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref4http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref4http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref5http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref5http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref6http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref6http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref7http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref7http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref8http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref8http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref8http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref7http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref6http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref5http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref4http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref3http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref2http://www.helium.com/items/new?id=393303-a-comparison-of-the-rulership-of-julius-caesar-and-napoleon-bonaparte#_ftnref1

English Caesar Napoleon

Documents

Transcript of English Caesar Napoleon