Was Napoleon a conqueror or a finisher of the revolution? I myself think so, that he was completely neither, rather both ie part part. The arguments I have found suggests that he greeted some principles of the revolution but only these transposed, which were of his own advantage. What do you think about it, you think more of a finisher or a conqueror? A arguing your opinion would be very nice.
The best answer
I consider the reasoned approach to correct to affirm not just one of the two statements altogether and the other to deny entirely, but all the arguments, whether one or the other alternative interpretation support to be considered. So a differentiated, proper assessment is best achieved.
Clarification is also what is meant by the terms. Finishing means something complete, to perfect to bring to a grand finale. Overcome can defeat mean defeat. However, Napoleon Bonaparte is simply known as opponents of the French Revolution and has suppressed it. Overcome can also mean an exit while preserving parts / achievements, not simply to the previous state (in this case, an absolute monarchy with a system of estates) declined, not eliminated all and abolished.
As a young man Napoleon supporter of the revolution has become. Then he put his own career in the foreground with a considerable opportunism.
Napoleon took in statements both roles in claim forth turned to one or the other point of view, depending on the context.
He could be represented as a conqueror of violent excesses as in the period 1793/1794. He has over the ensuing period (time of the Board from 1795 to 1799) achieved a greater stabilization in many areas. he has retained The resulting property ownership. Some principles welcomed and rely on them.
An assessment as having completed I believe only in a few specific areas for applicable. Because Napoleon has rebuilt a hereditary monarchy and eliminated the political participation rights. In larger scale Napoleon has been a completers of the French Revolution. If overcomer is meant in this sense, outweighs the role of conqueror.
Napoleon Bonaparte ended the French Revolution. He has brought them to a standstill, set in a coup (in November1799) to the top (first he was First Consul, then Emperor in 1804) abolished, popular sovereignty and democratic choice of popular representation. On the other hand, Napoleon has also preserved some of the achievements of the French Revolution and brought to a close (the most significant achievement is probably the Civil Code).
In his own view Napoleon both the revolution has ended and completed. The claim to be their finisher, but can be questioned with good reason and is not justified in its extent.
For release of the new consular constitution, which should be confirmed in a referendum, the consuls have issued a proclamation in December 1799:
"La Constitution est fondée sur les principes du Gouvernement vrais représentatif, sur les droits de la propriété sacrés, de l'égalité, liberté de la. Les pouvoirs qu'elle institue seronts forts et stable, means qu'il doivents, être pour les droits des citoyens garantir et les intérêts de l'Etat. Citoyens, la Revolution est fixée aux principes qui l'ont commencée: elle est finie ".
"The Constitution is based on the true principles of representative government and the sacred rights of property, equality and freedom. The forces employed by it will be strong and stable, as they must be to guarantee citizens' rights and state interests. Citizens, the revolution is set to the principles that were at its beginning: it is finished ".
The statement is ambiguous. Napoleon submits a particular presentation, which aims at the approval. Napoleon takes lay claim to secure gains of the revolution and to secure, on the other hand he declares it to be over and finished. He wants an agreement of the supporters of the revolution, which some standing on top principles are important and would like to see preserved the fact that there is ownership. On the other hand he reaches wishes to stabilize at (both to radical revolutionaries and royalist counter-revolution) and an end of turmoil and revolutionary excesses. Quitting can be used as a stopping revolutionary dynamics as especially 1793 - 1794 occurred, be understood.
Individuals not only make history for their own, that's nonsense, mere addition bürgeliche ideology. they are always representatives a certain layer class that they represent and whatever expression of its time. In the period 1789-1794 the Napoleonic policy would not purely fitted, hätzte had no chance of being realized. Overcomers and perfecter because you were allowed to have are correct.
The National Convention has 1794 Slavery prohibited, Napoleon led 1802 again.
That shows what character of Napoleon