What do you think?
Rate this book
Europe Under Napoleon
Napoleon Bonaparte dominated the public life of Europe like no other individual before him. Not surprisingly, the story of the man himself has usually swamped he stories of his subjects. This book looks at the history of the Napoleonic Empire from an entirely new perspective – that of the ruled rather than the ruler. Michael Broers concentrates on the experience of the people of Europe – particularly the vast majority of Napoleon's subjects who were neither French nor willing participants in the great events of the period – during the dynamic but short-lived career of Napoleon, when half of the European content fell under his rule.
320 pages, Paperback
First published September 1, 1996
8 people are currently reading
229 people want to read
About the author
Michael Broers
20 books43 followersMichael George Broers is the Professor of Western European History at the University of Oxford. He graduated with an MA from the University of St Andrews in 1978 and a Ph.D. from the University of Oxford in 1982.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
September 1, 2012
Broers' book is an excellent, well-written survey of how Napoleon's policy decisions affected the people in the regions that were under his direct control and also those regions further afield, in his extended sphere of influence.
The twin evils of taxation & conscription constantly raise their heads throughout the book. Broers shows how both were the fuel on which Napoleon's empire was expanded, and how both bred discontent & resistance at home and abroad. He also shows how the Napoleonic system sought to overcome that resistance.
The books explores the French sense of cultural superiority, and how that sense of superiority was both motivation & justification for the expansion of the empire. But then Broers also argues that after Tilsit, the tightening of the economic blockade of Britain became the motivating factor behind all of Napoleon's military & political decisions.
One of the most interesting aspects of the book, to me, was the author's division of Napoleon's empire into 'the inner empire' and 'the outer empire,' and how he shows that the Napoleonic system's influence varied considerably even within different parts of those areas.
The twin evils of taxation & conscription constantly raise their heads throughout the book. Broers shows how both were the fuel on which Napoleon's empire was expanded, and how both bred discontent & resistance at home and abroad. He also shows how the Napoleonic system sought to overcome that resistance.
The books explores the French sense of cultural superiority, and how that sense of superiority was both motivation & justification for the expansion of the empire. But then Broers also argues that after Tilsit, the tightening of the economic blockade of Britain became the motivating factor behind all of Napoleon's military & political decisions.
One of the most interesting aspects of the book, to me, was the author's division of Napoleon's empire into 'the inner empire' and 'the outer empire,' and how he shows that the Napoleonic system's influence varied considerably even within different parts of those areas.
August 28, 2019
What a great book! Broers offers an overview of Napoleonic Europe, bringing together the experiences from the coasts of the Baltic via the North Sea, the Atlantic and the Mediterranean to the Illyrian.
This is not a book about Napoleon, but about the international system he built out of the revolutionary inheritance. While the first expansion of the French empire had been mostly a result of revolutionary conquest and sister republics, the superiority of French arms between 1800 and 1812 brought new areas into imperial orbit. From 1806 the economic blockade against Great Britain became a driving force behind expansion.
The empire is not so much described as a political unit but as a system of political control in which the relation to the Napoleonic state was determined by the level to which the area was able to produce administrative results: conscripts, taxes and economic blockade of British goods. If the results disappointed, Paris increased control. So while the reforming south German states retained their independence, the Batavian Republic was put under ever closer oversight.
Local elites were forced to choose between collaboration and resistance. The empire offered benefits to its subjects, the most important being public order and equity before the law. Napoleon offered the inclusion of the local elites in his system administration. In easily accessible areas these factors proved powerful enough by themselves to obtain collaboration of the notables.
But there were inherent contradictions in the empire. The economic blockade destroyed many coastal areas. The burden of conscription was felt to be greater than the benefits that the empire brought. In areas where the struggle against the catholic church was unpopular and the terrain offered deserters, smugglers and bandits enough room to evade the marechausées, the imperial hold was strenuous.
The inner empire was not synonymous with France. Western France delivered lower numbers of conscripts than the western bank of the Rhine and Northern Italy.
This is not a book about Napoleon, but about the international system he built out of the revolutionary inheritance. While the first expansion of the French empire had been mostly a result of revolutionary conquest and sister republics, the superiority of French arms between 1800 and 1812 brought new areas into imperial orbit. From 1806 the economic blockade against Great Britain became a driving force behind expansion.
The empire is not so much described as a political unit but as a system of political control in which the relation to the Napoleonic state was determined by the level to which the area was able to produce administrative results: conscripts, taxes and economic blockade of British goods. If the results disappointed, Paris increased control. So while the reforming south German states retained their independence, the Batavian Republic was put under ever closer oversight.
Local elites were forced to choose between collaboration and resistance. The empire offered benefits to its subjects, the most important being public order and equity before the law. Napoleon offered the inclusion of the local elites in his system administration. In easily accessible areas these factors proved powerful enough by themselves to obtain collaboration of the notables.
But there were inherent contradictions in the empire. The economic blockade destroyed many coastal areas. The burden of conscription was felt to be greater than the benefits that the empire brought. In areas where the struggle against the catholic church was unpopular and the terrain offered deserters, smugglers and bandits enough room to evade the marechausées, the imperial hold was strenuous.
The inner empire was not synonymous with France. Western France delivered lower numbers of conscripts than the western bank of the Rhine and Northern Italy.
June 21, 2016
You can say that I always knew Napoleon conquered but never thought about the fact that he ruled. Broers does a service in showing what it was like in each of the areas that Napoleon took over for good or for bad. He distinguishes parts of the "outer empire" from parts of the "inner empire." In the former, he was hated and his changes resented. In the latter, he set up an institutional system that lived on after he was gone. Very interesting.
December 21, 2019
I LIKE THIS BOOK.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews