The myth of Napoleon and the Napoleonic years for the Romantics of the second wave

The myth of Napoleon has been found to have played a significant role in the development of the second wave of French romantic poetry. Such poets as Hugo and Musset were greatly influenced by the events that were considered to have been irrevocably tied to Napoleon, and it is to these myths that some of their greatest works can be attributed. While this may be the fact, the outside world seems to know very little concerning this remarkable man who is often considered to have been the villain in the stories concerning him outside of France itself. In Britain, for example, the fact that Napoleon was considered an enemy of the British civilisation has continued to be the view in the current world and this has affected the way that they view the French ruler (Semmel, 2005). It is said that he was short in stature and that because of his height; he felt that everyone looked down on him, making him want to achieve greatness in compensation. Despite the stereotypes that have developed concerning Napoleon in some countries, the fact remains that he was the greatest ruler that France had ever had since Charlemagne.

One myth that has often been propagated concerning Napoleon was his height, which many stated that was quite short. This myth has turned out not to be true and this has been mainly because of the fact that he was 5’7”, which was about the average height of a Frenchman in the nineteenth century. In addition, Napoleon was a genuine believer in a united Europe which united all the European peoples under one state, despite their nationalities and ethnicities, so that there could be lasting peace between them (Clifford, 2008). During this period, it was the British, not Napoleon, who did not want a peaceful settlement to the dispute concerning the dominion of the French empire over Europe, because the French empire was believed to be a potential threat to the prosperity of British trade and security both on land and at sea. An example of the reluctance of the British to reach a peaceful settlement with Napoleon was seen through the British breaking the treaty of Amiens, which resulted in war. In the resultant war, Napoleon only went to war because he wanted to retain his crown and not because he was in any way antagonistic towards the British. It is a fact that unlike other rulers in Europe who after defeat could still simply remains in power, this was not the case with Napoleon and this was because he was considered by the other rulers in Europe to be an upstart, who had taken the crown that legitimately belonged to the Bourbons (Furniss, 2008). Thus, Napoleon could not afford to lose a fight because if he did, then all would be lost for him, an example of this being when in 1812, rumours spread that he had been killed in the Russian campaign, the British worked towards the restoration of the Bourbons, overlooking Napoleon’s son’s claim to the throne.

The romantic poets garnered their inspiration from Napoleon, whom they praised considerably in their works while comparing him to his less liked nephew, Napoleon III, who was the French emperor at the time. The image of Napoleon as a hero was not reflected in countries outside France, especially Britain, where the government worked tirelessly to ensure that the reputation of Napoleon was damaged beyond repair. There was the use of widespread propaganda which included the distribution of pamphlets and newspaper articles which stated that Napoleon was a usurper to the French throne who had murdered the rightful monarchs of other European states. In addition, it was stated that Napoleon was an invader of free nations whose aim was to ensure that Britain was brought under his control. The British population was of the belief that their country was about to be invaded by Napoleon worked in the increasing of the negative public opinion of him. However, the dread of Napoleon’s invasion of Britain was not apparent, especially when one considers the fact that during the peace of Amiens, he allowed tourists from Britain to flock to France. These tourists showed a grudging admiration and fascination for the achievements of Napoleon in France, which were quite considerable when compared to his contemporaries. Even after his defeat at Waterloo, when Napoleon was shipped to British waters, it is stated that a large number of small vessels approached the ship in which he was being held so that they could catch a glance of the man who many feared yet admired in equal measure (Ruppert, 2012). Napoleon was so popular that people travelled from far in Britain to see him, and this was a cause for panic for the British government, which feared that Napoleon’s popularity would influence a popular uprising within Britain itself. This is the reason why he was exiled on St. Helena Island, far from Britain, because he was considered a direct threat if he were to step on British soil.

The charisma of Napoleon is one of the factors which have contributed to the development of the Napoleonic myth. He is probably the only ruler in modern world history who, after being ousted from power and sent into exile, returned to his throne without a single shot being fired. When news of his returned reached the French, they immediately accepted it and their soldiers flocked to his banners in a show of support. The people cheered his return, looking upon it as a return to the peace and prosperity that they had enjoyed under his rule. The fact that the Bourbon king was quickly forgotten with the return of Napoleon is a testament of his charisma as well as the popularity that he enjoyed among the French people. The ability of Napoleon to move the masses can only be considered to be remarkable, because it showed just how much he was favoured by them. The return of Napoleon to Paris and his throne captivated the political and academic elites all over Europe because such an event had never happened before, thus totally unexpected (Stanley, 2007).

During the period of the romantic poets, the fascination over Napoleon and his legacy was still at its peak, with the man’s achievements being so diverse that they created a wide array of myths that bred confusion concerning him. Romantic poets like Hugo, for example, were extremely influenced by the Napoleonic myth especially when one considers that he was born in the period under Napoleon’s rule. In addition, Hugo’s father was a general under Napoleon and he taught his son to have immense reverence and admiration for Napoleon; an admiration which Hugo carried all his life and which he often compared to that of Napoleon III, whom he considered to be a pale shadow of his glorious uncle (Spevack, 1996). Among the most enduring aspects of the Napoleonic legacy were the wars which he fought in order to achieve a united Europe under French dominion. Where Louis XIV had failed, Napoleon succeeded because he managed to bring most of Europe under French rule and to spread the seed of the revolution over the borders of France to other European nations. Because of his achievements, the period under Napoleon’s rule was considered by the romantic poets to be the greatest in French history since he had led the country not only to greatness but also to almost uninterrupted peace and prosperity. The leadership ability of Napoleon was often praised in French romantic poetry and this also played a role in the further development of the Napoleonic myth to what it is in the current age. The myth of Napoleon’s political genius was often stated through his actions after he decided to get directly involved in the government of France (Skiff, 2012). He made popular political marriage to one of the most famous women in France at the time, Josephine de Beauharnais, which further enhanced Napoleon’s image as the national hero. A few years after this, Napoleon was able to gain power in France, in the period which came to be known as the consulate. His political genius then came into play as he had the constitution revised, making him the most powerful man in the country, and with this new power, he was able to have the authority to appoint all the people who were to occupy strategic positions. With Napoleon’s rise to power, it can be said that while the French Revolution officially came to an end, his actions showed that he was indeed a child of the revolution. He swiftly reformed all the crucial sectors in the government, making them more efficient than they had ever been before. Reforms were carried out in such sectors as the economy, the judicial system, as well as the education system.

Napoleon’s greatness was further seen when he restored those basic freedoms which the French people had been denied. One of these freedoms was the freedom of religion, which Napoleon reinstated by inviting the Catholic Church back to France, but while this was the case, however, he did not give the Church the absolute authority it once had, and instead, its activities were placed under the supervision of the state. Very few people in the history of France during the age of the romantic poets had received the approval and admiration of the French people like had Napoleon. The fact that he was extremely popular with the French public, especially after the restoration of the empire under Napoleon III, the romantic writers wrote a great deal, not only because they admired him themselves, but also because of the fact that they were writing for an audience that was fairly pro-Napoleon and was nostalgic for the days of greatness that he had made possible for them. Even during the romantic age, there had been written many books and accounts concerning Napoleon and these were read widely by the learned elites in French society (Martin, 2000). The accounts of the life of Napoleon may have played a significant role in the characterisation of this man in the poems influenced by romanticism. The myths surrounding the life and achievements of Napoleon had a great deal of influence on the poetry that was written during the age of romanticism and this is because of the fact that they inspired the works of the romantic writers, who wrote all that was positive concerning the life of this man. In most of the works of the romantic writers, one will find that there is heavy criticism of the rulers that came after Napoleon and these were often compared unfavourably with him; this being in part a further development concerning the Napoleonic myth.

Napoleon was among the people who were most admired during the age of romanticism, not only as a leader of men, but also as a man devoted to his family. This admiration does not just stem from the fact that he is one of the greatest men to have ever lived in France, but it also came from the way he conducted himself throughout his life. For many French people, Napoleon was a unique man, who rose from extremely humble origins and became the emperor of France at its most powerful in history. His life was the subject of numerous literatures, with some writers supporting his deeds while others have condemned them. Despite these disagreements about Napoleon, one thing, which all writers agreed upon, was that he was indeed an extraordinary man. Most romantic poets considered Napoleon to have been one of the foremost, military general in world history. Within a few years after becoming the French emperor, he had brought most of continental Europe under his rule. Furthermore, he had created a unique system of government, the like of which had never been seen in Europe. To the romantic poets, the achievements of this man were far superior to those of his successors, none of whom proved to be as capable as he had been. It can therefore be said that the Napoleonic myth influenced romantic poets because it also included the sense of nostalgia for the time of Napoleon, which was the greatest in French history.

Gender and Power in the Renaissance Period

The Renaissance period is one which saw significant advancement in the arts and culture of Europe as a result of the coming to an end of the Middle Ages and the rise of the modern period. It was a period that brought with it great changes in society although the latter essentially remained a patriarchal society. The submission of women towards men was considered to be the ideal in society and even those women who had considerable power, such as Queen Elizabeth I were required to be seen to submit to the ‘wisdom’ of their male advisors rather than taking their own counsel in matters concerning the governance of the state. Women, considered to be lesser creatures than men, were denied real power because of the feeling by society that they were not equipped to wield it.

The reign of Queen Elizabeth I can be considered to be among the best in English history because she presided over great achievements. It was under her that England was able to first exercise incredible ability as a naval power that would rival other great maritime powers such as Spain and Portugal. Furthermore, for the first time in history, the country was led by a strong woman who, unlike her sister Mary before her, took an active part in government and did what she had to do to ensure the security of her kingdom. However, despite these achievements, Queen Elizabeth, as a woman, was expected to receive counsel from her male advisors; meaning that society was not ready to admit that women had the ability to lead. In a world which was dominated by religious beliefs, women were believed to be inferior to men to such an extent that they needed a constant male presence in order to make major decisions. Women were relegated to taking care of their households and were expected to constantly submit either to their fathers, husbands, or to other male members of their families. Such a situation proved to be serious especially in a situation where women, especially in English society, were for the first time taking the throne in their own right. The ability of women to lead was constantly disregarded by the patriarchal society which sought to make sure that the role of women was kept in the background rather than given prominence in the rest of society.

Additionally, despite England being ruled for over half a century by women during the Renaissance, there were really few changes in society when it came to the achievement of political power by women. This is especially the case considering that women had almost no legal rights and could therefore not participate in public life. Even Queens Mary and Elizabeth had to a large extent to submit to the will of their male advisors when it came to matters on governance; essentially continuing to propagate the male-dominated society within which they lived. It was also through the development of the norm of female dependency before and during the Renaissance that women were almost completely excluded from public life. The belief that women had to be completely dependent on the men in their lives meant that the freedoms that they had previously enjoyed were brought to an end (Deats, 2003, p.189). Women had to submit themselves to their fathers, and after marriage, to their husbands. Women who did not submit to a male authority more often than not earned themselves a bad reputation in society and ended up being marginalized. Therefore, women were expected to remain in the background of public life and were not to be heard while their male counterparts took an active role in it in addition to having almost complete authority over the women. All real political power in society remained in the hands of men and very few women were able to achieve any significant role in the governance of their society.

Moreover, it is important to note that during the Renaissance period, the major vocation of women was marriage; expected of women of all classes. One of the most significant aspects of marriage during this period was that it led to a situation where women ended up losing all their rights and freedom of action. They could not own property and had to be completely submissive to their husbands because once married, their husbands had full rights over their persons. It is most likely as a result of such circumstances that Queen Elizabeth chose not to get married because marriage would have restricted the exercise of her power. Instead, she remained unmarried for the whole of her reign since marriage would have almost automatically led to a situation where her husband became king and the main decision-maker in the running of affairs in England. Elizabeth’s decision not to get married may have been wholly political since it was a means of not only securing her reign, but also making sure that her position remained intact through denying any potential husband her birthright. In addition, she chose to use the potential of marriage as a political tool to secure the interests of England because of the significant number of suitors from powerful European countries. However, while the promise of marriage ensured the security of the interests of England, it never came to fruition because Elizabeth was able to skillfully maneuver her way out of such arrangements. Therefore, despite the expectation that she would end up getting married and submit to her husband, Queen Elizabeth was able to transcend such social expectations by choosing not to get married; retaining her political power in a male-dominated society.

Furthermore, there was a failure by men in Renaissance society to recognize the value of women in their lives. Among the values that were often ignored by men was that their societies could not continue to function without the women in them. Even though they were not allowed to take part in the social and political life of their societies, women played an active role in making sure that they projected a positive image on behalf of the men in their lives. However, despite this, women continued to be relegated to the background with those who dared to speak their minds being considered an anomaly and discriminated against by the rest of society. Women themselves may have also helped to prop up the patriarchal system which was meant to make sure that they were kept out of power because they allowed themselves to be almost completely dominated by the men in their lives. Even the perceptions they had of themselves were often shaped by the views that the men in their lives had of them (Levy, 2001, p.83). The refusal to submit to the opinions of the men in their lives meant that women had to endure isolation as well as fear from both men and women because being outspoken was considered to be against the natural order of society and deserved to be broken off the women involved. Thus, men were justified in using whatever means necessary, including violence, as a way of making sure that the women in their lives remained submissive and in the background; conforming to societal norms.

Also, the religious nature of Renaissance society played a significant role in making sure that women were kept away from power. This was especially the case where religious teachings emphasized that women had to submit to their husbands and fathers as a means of making sure that they did the will of God. However, there was often a failure to note that women were given equality to their male counterparts in the New Testament and that they took part in similar activities as the men. Despite this argument, women in the Renaissance period were not allowed to take an active part in the administration of their own property as long as either their fathers or husbands were still alive. The only way for women, especially from the upper class, to attain a degree of freedom as well as to exercise their rights was through making sure that they did not get married at all (Enterline, 1999, p.25). As seen in the case of Queen Elizabeth above, women were able to achieve a level of independence by not having men in their lives because under such circumstances, they did not have to cede their rights. While this may have been the case, Elizabeth was still required, to an extent, to be seen to submit to the counsel of her male advisors because of the common belief at the time that women had no political sense and that only men could be able to take part in it without the involvement of emotion. It is as a result of such perceptions that it became possible for a great number of women to be kept out of public life with those who spoke their minds being described in derogatory terms.

 However, while it was uncommon for women in the Renaissance to participate in public life, there were instances where some of them were able to privately influence the opinions of their sons and husbands. Women were able to exercise their influence through pushing the men in their lives to adopt their views; leading to a situation where these women, through their husbands, were able to push their own agenda in society forward. Therefore, while not having any real political power, women were able to bring about diverse changes in their societies either through the men in their lives or their actions which can be considered to have been acts of protest. In Shakespeare’s The Rape of Lucrese, Lucrere, the main character, ends up committing suicide as a result of being raped by Tarquin and it is as a consequence of this suicide that the populace of Rome overthrows the Tarquin dynasty and becomes a republic (Kirkland, 1999, p.660). The depiction of the actions of women having an influence on the course of society in this play shows that despite the discrimination that they faced when it came to public life in the Renaissance period, there were instances where they had a profound impact (Shakespeare, 1997, 2.3.259-60). Renaissance writers, however, seem not to consider the actions of these women to have been conscious actions and instead, their consequences were indirect and not intended. The recognition of the role of women in public life remained limited in the Renaissance and these continued to be relegated to the background in the belief that women had no constructive place in male-dominated society and had to submit to men.

In addition, Renaissance literature shows a majority of women as being completely dedicated to domestic chores while the men got involved in public life. In Lucrere, the title character is shown to be an individual who is highly proficient in domestic tasks as well as being able to make sure that she undertakes tasks that are essentially feminine. However, there is the propagation of the idea that women are weak individuals and need constant male protection in order to be safe. In this case, Lucrere is shown to be an individual who, despite her proficiency in domestic tasks, is neither able to protect herself or the home from an invasion by the stronger Tarquin (Shakespeare, 1997, lines 232 - 238). The violation of her body by Tarquin and her devastation afterwards is a sign of the fragility of women and the need for them to have male protection. Lucrere’s lack of male protection at the time of her rape shows her vulnerability because there was no one to stop Tarquin from doing such a vile act (Kelemen, 2005, p.151). Lucrere’s rape can also be considered to be a means of showing the power of men over women in all social matters because it is women who have to submit to the will of men. It is also a sign of the unwillingness of the patriarchal system to recognize that women are the equals of men and that they have a right to have a place in public matters. The subjugation of women to the will of men in society is a means of the latter exercising their power and dominance over women in such a way that it propagates the status quo.

Also, upper class women were often used for the purpose of advancing the interests of their families. These women were married off to more powerful and affluent families in order to form alliances with them. This is especially the case in Renaissance European countries where fathers were the ones who made decisions concerning who their daughters could marry in a bid to secure useful alliances for their families. A famous example is that of Pope Alexander VI who made use of his daughter Lucrecia as a means of solidifying alliances with powerful Italian dynasties when it was convenient for him. The various marriages that Lucrecia got in and were annulled were for political purposes because they ensured that the wealth and power of the Borgia family were maintained. Therefore, while such women as Lucrecia got more opportunities for mobility that other women of their time, they still had to submit to the will of their fathers for the sake of their families. Furthermore, they were not able to gain significant power despite their mobility because they had to submit to the will of their husbands so that they had to conform to the ideal of being the caretakers of the household. As a result, a major theme of Renaissance literature was the subjugation of women because they were not often prominently featured in the said literature, and if they were, their role was supplementary. Thus, women were depicted as fragile individuals whose role in society was in the periphery and that their involvement in public affairs would lead to chaos.

Likewise, women were denied a voice in society because of the belief that they were inferior and that they were emotional individuals who did not have the capacity to think rationally (Carrera, 2005, p.63). Women who would have been rulers in their own right, such as Maria-Therese of Austria could not achieve real power because they were expected to submit to their husbands. Maria-Therese’s husband, Joseph, is the one who took over control of the Austrian Empire when her father died while she took on a more subordinate role. The result of such circumstances was that women ended up being denied their inheritance and property rights by their husbands; making it more difficult for them to advance in society than their male counterparts. Even in those situations where women found themselves to be unmarried, they were expected to seek a close male relative to not only protect them, but also to manage any wealth that they might have. Women in the Renaissance period, as reflected in its literature, were considered to be essentially weak individuals who could not be trusted to govern their own affairs and instead had to make sure that they placed themselves under the protection of the men in their lives in order to achieve a level of security. The enforcement of the masculine dominance of society came about as a result because women ended up being largely accepted as the lesser of the members of society while at the same time having to endure being denied all the rights that were accorded to men. Female monarchs such as Queen Elizabeth did not seek to change the status quo and instead sought to propagate it; making it possible for the patriarchal system to perpetuate itself.

In conclusion, women were denied real power because of the belief in society that they were not equipped to wield it. Despite this perception, as shown in the discussion above, the reign of Queen Elizabeth I can be considered to be among the best in English history because she presided over great achievements. Additionally, during her reign, there were really few changes in society when it came to the achievement of political power by women since the major vocation of women was marriage. Furthermore, there was a failure by men in Renaissance society to recognize the value of women in their lives. This is also the case where the religious nature of Renaissance society played a significant role in making sure that women were kept away from power. However, there were instances where some of them were able to privately influence the opinions of their sons and husbands. Also, upper class women were often used for the purpose of advancing the interests of their families; hence greater mobility for them through marriage. Finally, women were denied a voice in society because of the belief that they were inferior and that they were emotional individuals who did not have the capacity to think rationally.

References

Carrera, E. 2005, “The Spiritual Role of the Emotions in Mechthild of Magdeburg, Angela of Foligno, and Teresa of Avila.” The Representation of Women’s Emotions in Medieval and Early Modern Culture. Ed. L. Perfetti. Gainesville, FL: UP of Florida.

Deats, S. 2003, "The 'Erring Barbarian' and the 'Maiden Never Bold': Racist and Sexist Representations in Othello." Women, Violence, and English Renaissance Literature: Essays Honoring Paul Jorgensen. Eds. L. Woodbridge and S. Beehler. Tempe, AZ: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies.

Enterline, L. 1999, "What 'Womanhood Denies' the Power of 'Tongues to Tell'." Shakespeare Studies, vol. 27, pp. 25-36.

Kelemen, C. 2005, “Images of Passion, Rape, and Grief: A Comparative Analysis of Shakespeare's Rape of Lucrere and Titus Andronicus.” Hungarian Journal of English and American Studies, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 151-73.

Kirkland, L.R. 1999, “To End Itself by Death: Suicide in Shakespeare’s Tragedies.” Southern Medical Journal, vol. 92, pp. 660-66.

Levy, E. 2001, “The Problematic Relation between Reason and Emotion in Hamlet.” Renascence: Essays on Values in Literature, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 83-95.

Shakespeare, W. 1997. Othello (Arden Shakespeare: Third Series). New York: Routledge.

Shakespeare, W. 1997. The Rape of Lucrere (Arden Shakespeare: Third Series). New York: Routledge.