Europe in 1812 (click for larger image): This map shows the French Empire when it reached its greatest territorial extent. By this point, the Low Countries, the the entire west bank of the Rhine, Piedmont, portions of western Italy, a slice of northeast Spain, and Illyria (that is, a portion of the Dalmatian coast) had all been formally annexed to France. The portion of Italy that was not annexed was either ruled by Napoleon (Kingdom of Italy) or Joachim Murat, one of Napoleon’s marshals (Kingdom of Naples). Napoleon himself was the Protector of the Confederation of the Rhine. His brother Joseph was the King of Spain (although his control of the country was shaky at best, contested as it was by a British army, Spanish forces, and guerrillas). Denmark and Norway, along with Austria and Prussia (the latter much reduced since its defeat in 1806) were allied to France. The Duchy of Warsaw was in a personal union with the Kingdom of Saxony which was a member of the Confederation of the Rhine. Napoleon appeared to have Europe well in hand. One must remember, though, that his control of Spain was contested and that there was widespread disorder in Italy; Austria and Prussia were unwilling allies (certainly, they showed no enthusiasm for the new European order); and Russia would soon become a deadly enemy.
Reading
For today, please read Hunt and Censer, pp. 224-229 and excerpts from Johann Fichte, Address to the German Nation (1808) (Canvas).
What We are Doing Today
We have mentioned the French empire in passing several times in the last couple of weeks, but today we will look at the empire in more depth. In what ways were annexed territories and satellite states absolutely indispensable to France? How did Napoleon treat and remodel these areas? And how did these areas react to French control? These are some of the questions we will investigate today.
Johann Gottlieb Fichte
Fichte (1762-1814) was a German philosopher born in Saxony who taught and wrote in Saxony, Switzerland, and Prussia. He took inspiration from the writings of Immanuel Kant, and he is often described as the founder of German idealism. No need to go into much detail here because, well, Kant’s philosophy (as well as Fichte’s) is extremely difficult to read.
What is important for our purposes, though, is that Fichte wrote Addresses to the German Nation in 1808, a collection of 14 essays. These addresses were a reaction not merely to Prussia’s defeat at Napoleon’s hands (which had occurred in 1806) but the degree to which almost all German lands had more or less fallen under French control. The sudden imposition of French political power and French revolutionary values in Germany led to a hostile reaction among some groups in this region. It was under these circumstances that a number of educated Germans began to develop a sense of themselves as members of a German nation that defined itself against French ideas. And thus, an ironic train of events occurred. The aggressive assertion of French national values in Europe, which the French saw as universal, that is, the possession of all people, actually inspired other Europeans—Germans, Italians, Spaniards, and Poles, to name several examples—to assert contrasting ideas about their own nationhood. These ideas contested the supremacy (and universality) of French beliefs, expressed national values that were at variance with France’s, and envisioned national missions that deviated from what the French had in mind. In other words, the emergence of European nationalisms during this period was often, but not always, a reaction against French nationalism.
As you read Fichte, keep in mind, though, that the emergence of European nationalisms were not solely a reaction against French policies. In a number of cases, French policies played a role in fostering these nationalisms. For example, the rationalization of administration and the consolidation of states that occurred in the Low Countries, Germany, and parts of Italy gave many observers a sense of how those peoples could be knitted together to form true national states.
Potential Quiz Questions
1) According to the textbook, what were the “contradictions” in Napoleon’s imperial policies in Europe?
2) What seems to have been the attitude of elites who collaborated with the French?
3) Generally, what did Napoleon seem to prioritize in annexed areas and satellite states? Legal and social reforms? Or spoils and resources for war?
4) Despite the exploitative nature of the Napoleonic regime in the satellite states, the textbook asserts “the rationalizing effort of the French paid dividends everywhere.” How was that the case?
5) How did France’s enemies like Austria and Prussia feel compelled to reform as a result of confrontation with France?
6) How did the war (and the Continental System) affect the French economy, both for good and evil?
7) In the opening paragraph of Fichte’s excerpt, he defines what a nation is. In your own words, what is this definition? In the next several paragraphs, he explains Germany’s mission. What was that mission, and in what kind of Europe did it truly belong?
8) If the German people were a true nation, why, according to Fichte, were they disunited politically?
9) On page 3, Fichte refers to how some people have begun to praise universal monarchy (i.e. one great state to which all peoples would belong—no doubt a reference to the Napoleonic empire). Why did he oppose such a state? Why should each people or nation have its own state?
Canvas Discussion Question
On the Canvas discussion board, we will discuss the question below. Remember that participation is mandatory.
In what ways was Fichte’s argument in the excerpt probably inspired by French revolutionary/imperial ideas–and a reaction against those same ideas? Please explain your answer.
Refer to the reading, and please be as precise as possible in your answers.
Feel free to interact and collaborate as you respond. Ask each other questions on the board. Synthesize other people’s responses. Work together to come up with solid answers. And feel free to make more than one contribution.
History 114: The French Revolution and Napoleon 