Napoleon was a tyrant

Conclusion / problematic / backup

Territorial transformation and modernization in Baden and Württemberg (and Europe as a whole) - cui bono?

Advantages for Napoleon: formation of modern medium-sized states as potential allies, glacis and counterweight to major continental powers (Prussia, Austria-Hungary, Russia) → loyalty to Napoleon, stabilization of Napoleonic rule

Advantages for the southwest German princes: Territorial expansion, comprehensive rule (secularization, mediatization), modernization (M 6: "Princely Revolution")

Advantages for the southwest German citizens: ideas of the French Revolution arrive in southwest Germany (legal security, equality before the law: Code Napoléon; modern administrative reform based on the French Revolution, but: no political modernization)

Conclusion:

Napoleon is only partially a modernizer in the spirit of the French Revolution. It remains to be seen whether the refused political modernization will lead to conflicts and endanger Napoleonic rule. So Napoleon is perceived in southwest Germany and Europe as a whole as a bearer of hope and a tyrant at the same time.

Further question, transition to the following lesson:

Are Poland and Hungary important to Napoleon for reasons similar to that of southwest Germany? (Reference back to M 3: “Poland, Hungary”) Is he perceived there as a bearer of hope?

Napoleon: Download [docx] [4 MB]

Go to Tiddy Doll