Статті в журналах з теми "France - Napoleon I, 1804-1815"

Do we need yet another book on Napoleon? Michael Broers answers, not exactly. According to Broers, what we need, and indeed what he has given us, is a sophisticated historical analysis of the impact of Napoleonic rule on conquered Europe from the point of view of the ruled. So, if you are looking for a book primarily on Napoleon the man and ruler, or one on France under Napoleon, you will need to look elsewhere.

Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821), also known as Napoleon I, was a French military leader and emperor who conquered much of Europe in the early 19th century. Born on the island of Corsica, Napoleon rapidly rose through the ranks of the military during the French Revolution (1789-1799). After seizing political power in France in a 1799 coup d’état, he crowned himself emperor in 1804. Shrewd, ambitious and a skilled military strategist, Napoleon successfully waged war against various coalitions of European nations and expanded his empire. However, after a disastrous French invasion of Russia in 1812, Napoleon abdicated the throne two years later and was exiled to the island of Elba. In 1815, he briefly returned to power in his Hundred Days campaign. After a crushing defeat at the Battle of Waterloo, he abdicated once again and was exiled to the remote island of Saint Helena, where he died at 51.Napoleon was responsible for spreading the values of the French Revolution to other countries, especially in legal reform and the abolition of serfdom. After the fall of Napoleon, not only was the Napoleonic Code retained by conquered countries including the Netherlands, Belgium, parts of Italy and Germany, but has been used as the basis of certain parts of law outside Europe including the Dominican Republic, the US state of Louisiana and the Canadian province of Quebec. The memory of Napoleon in Poland is favorable, for his support for independence and opposition to Russia, his legal code, the abolition of serfdom, and the introduction of modern middle class bureaucracies. The social structure of France changed little under the First Empire. It remained roughly what the Revolution had made it: a great mass of peasants comprising three-fourths of the population—about half of them works owners of their farms or sharecroppers and the other half with too little land for their own subsistence and hiring themselves out as laborers. Industry, stimulated by the war and the blockade of English goods, made remarkable progress in northern and eastern France, whence exports could be sent to central Europe; but it declined in the south and west because of the closing of the Mediterranean and the Atlantic. The great migrations from rural areas toward industry in the towns began only after 1815. The nobility would probably have declined more swiftly if Napoleon had not restored it, but it could never recover its former privileges. Finally we can say that many of the territories occupied by Napoleon during his Empire began to feel a new sense of nationalism.

When Napoleon returned from exile on the island of Elba, he immediately set about gathering the support that he hoped would re-establish him as ruler of France. No sooner had he disembarked at Antibes on 1 March 1815 than he began issuing proclamations in which he portrayed himself as the leading soldier of the Republic and a man of the Revolution. His appeals found a welcome response in the French populace that astonished his opponents and perhaps surprised the emperor as well. Napoleon had changed the very nature of Bonapartism by allying himself with the tradition of the Revolution, and the federation movement which swept across France during the six weeks prior to Waterloo was a direct response to his new appeal.

Relations between France and the Habsburg Empire during the long nineteenth century went through several phases bounded by the events crucial not just to the two countries' mutual relations but to all of Europe. The Congress of Vienna defined their mutual relations for the next thirty years. The Habsburgs and their omnipresent minister Metternich were fearful of revolutionary and liberal movements traditionally having their origins in France. And it was the revolutionary events of 1848 that brought about a change in the balance of power and their mutual relations. Metternich's retirement and, more importantly, the arrival of the Russian armies in Central Europe and the subsequent strengthening of Prussia, conferred a new importance to the role of the Habsburg Monarchy as a bulwark against the advancement of Russia and a vital counterweight to Prussia. With the defeat of Napoleon III and the creation of Germany with Alsace and Lorraine Franco-Austrian relations entered a new phase. The destiny of the two provinces alienated the Habsburgs from the French Republic, especially after the reorganization of Europe into two confronting blocs. The logic of alliances led to their being adversaries in the world conflict, although Napoleon III's geo-strategic analyses remained present almost to its very end, when Clemenceau's government gave support to the nationality principle thereby crucially contributing to the collapse of the Habsburg Monarchy.

In this clear and compact book Martyn Lyons demonstrates how Napoleon tamed, reshaped, reformed, and preserved the achievements of the French Revolution and created the centralized administrative system that has persisted in France to this day. Here we learn why after Waterloo people referred to revolution and Napoleon almost in the same breath. In the world after 1815 the remnants of the first had been submerged into the stunning accomplishments of the second.

In the days following Napoleon Bonaparte's nomination as Emperor of the French in May 1804, two decrees were introduced to French society: the décret du 24 messidor an XII and the décret du 29 messidor an XII. The first organized the French court into a hierarchy of privilege, placing Napoleon and his closest friends and advisors at the top of a complex pyramid of social capital. The second decree reoriented the court away from the sartorial egalitarianism of the French Revolution by legislating court costumes of varying colours and embroidery designs to correspond with each newly created governmental and courtly rank. Many histories of this period connect Napoleon's court costumes to his desire to strengthen the French silk industry, but less is understood about how Napoleon used these court costumes at his courts outside of France as organizational and imperialistic tools of social control. This article will consider how the décret du 24 messidor and the décret du 29 messidor were implemented in Paris and in the Kingdom of Italy in Milan in 1805, revealing that even as Napoleon's government attempted to structure French courtly society through codes of sartorial display, personal expression for men was still possible, especially through embroidery.

The revolution in provincial France. Aquitaine, 1789–1799. By A. Forrest. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996. Pp. vi+377. £45.Fair shares for all. Jacobin egalitarianism in practice. By J.-P. Gross. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Pp. xv+255. £30.Europe under Napoleon, 1799–1815. By M. Broers. London: Edward Arnold, 1996. Pp. xii+291. £15.99.

The article refers to the connection between royalist publicism and anti-Napoleonic caricature through the example of two etchings from the Khanenko Museum collection. The task of royalist propaganda was to undermine the authority of Napoleon Bonaparte and, at the same time, to set society in favor of the Bourbon restoration. This causes the specifics of the anti-Napoleonic pamphlets and caricatures, which were usually focused on creating of the repulsive images of the emperor. At the same time, it is easy to notice that the authors of texts and images operated with a common set of motifs, images, as well as they used similar techniques. Therefore, the analysis of pamphlets provides better understanding of the subject of studied etchings and helps to clarify the meaning of certain details. Furthermore, taking into account that caricature was often secondary to the texts, author strived to find the literary sources of the studied caricatures and came to the conclusion that Charon’s famous engraving “The Height of Cannibalism” was strongly influenced by the François-René Chateaubriand’s “Report on the State of France” (1815). The matching texts, as well as the general consonance of the caricature “Arrival of Nicolas Buonaparte in Tuileries on January 20, 1815” with Rougemaitre’s popular anti-Napoleonic pamphlet “Life of Nicolas” (1815) suggests that the latter was among the caricaturist’s sources of inspiration at least.

RÉSUMÉ. Exprimant un message, une image est utilisée comme moyens de communication. Malgré son effet comique, une caricature politique construit indispensablement un discours politique. En 1804 James Gillray a lancé un dessin satirique qui dénonce Napoléon Bonaparte ainsi que les idées républicaines de la Révolution de 1789 pour sensibiliser le public Britannique par ses regards royalistes contre la France révolutionnaire et napoléonienne. La présente recherche s’insère sur l’étude sémiologique de l’image publiée pendant cette période turbulente et l’analyse s’effectue en appliquant les lectures dénotative et connotative sur les signes linguistiques, iconiques et plastiques. Cette analyse a pour but de montrer comment cette caricature communique ses messages et comment l’artiste communique son engagement politique. Les résultats montrent que l’artiste a transmis son message par les parallélismes ainsi que par les oppositions que tous les signes reposent sur l’image. Mots-clés : analyse d’image, angleterre, caricature, révolution française. ABSTRACT. Expressing a message, an image is used as a tool of communication. Despite its comic effects, a political caricature unavoidably constructs a political discourse. In 1804, James Gillray launched a satirical drawing that denounced Napoleon Bonaparte and the Republican ideas of the Revolution of 1789 to alert the British public through his royalist point of view against revolutionary and Napoleonic France. This research is based on the semiological study of the image which was published during this turbulent period and the analysis is carried out by applying the denotative and connotative readings on linguistic, iconic and plastic signs. This research aims to show how this caricature transfers its messages and how the artist declared communicate his political commitments. The results show that the artist sent his message through the parallelism as well as the oppositions that all the signs rest on the image.Keywords: caricature, caricature analysis, England, French revolution.

The article is devoted to the analysis of historical aspects, the reasons for the reform and its consequences. An analysis of the factors that influenced the development of events was carried out, namely: not the ability of the then state and local authorities to create and implement an effective system of public administration at all levels; a political crisis, which was caused by the struggle of various political parties and groups, which subsequently led to chaos in the highest echelons of power and was characterized by constant changes among political forces, which ultimately paralyzed the work of the entire state-management apparatus, and expectedly covered local authorities. The features of the person of Napoleon Bonaparte as the ideologist and implementer of this administrative reform are considered, which was based on the principles of centralization of power and worked effectively for two centuries, practically without significant transformations, and will continue to be the basis for today's administrative system of the French Republic. The specifics of the formation and functioning of state authorities during the consulate period (1799-1804) were clarified, and the issue of the possibility of coexistence and interaction of centralization and decentralization was also considered. Scientific attention is focused on the constitutional powers of legislative and executive institutions, their interaction and work efficiency. The main features of the political regime in France in the period 1799-1815 were determined, namely: the dominance of the executive over the legislative; reliance on the authority of the head of the executive power; control by the central executive power of the local self-government system; suppression of the opposition. It turned out that as a result of the above, the Bonapartist regime ensured political stability, centralized the entire state system of power, and created the archetype of the historical authoritarian regime. It was analyzed the possibility of using certain elements and ideas, as well as taking into account the shortcomings of this reform, when carrying out administrative reform in Ukraine.

In a self-reflective introduction to what was, sadly, his last publication, an essay collection, John Merriman lamented that the nineteenth century has been forgotten among historians of France. Noting the absence of books on this period in the Fnac bookstore at Les Halles in Paris, he wrote the following: In thinking about French history from 1815 to the present, one thing now seems perfectly clear to me. As time moves relentlessly along, the century between 1815 and World War I is in some ways far less visible than it was when I became a historian.…For years the shelves [of such bookstores] had been organized chronologically: the French Revolution and Napoleon, then the nineteenth century, subdivided, and then the Great War. But the sections now jumped from Napoleon to the Great War! What had happened to the long nineteenth century? (What happened to my books?)…The revolutions of 1830 and 1848, which had so engaged folks like me for quite some time, seemed to have had their day.

This subject, an important aspect of cultural history as well as the history of political images, examines the struggle between the imperial power of Napoleon 1st and Louis XVIII th, by studying political caricatures produced during the years 1814 and 1815. Many political symbols proceed from the old regime culture, others belong to the revolutionary times but there is a novelty, the « éteignoir », an old fashioned cap, pointing out the darkness of the restaured Bourbons monarchy. Finally, France is the great victim of these royal struggle.

These words introduced a collection entitledDeutsche Wehrlieder für das Königlich-Preussische Frei-Corps(German Military Songs for the Royal Prussian Volunteer Corps), that appeared in March 1813 immediately after Prussia declared war on France. It was not only in this songbook that the patriotic national mobilization for the struggle against Napoleonic rule was closely linked to the propagation of “valorous manliness” (wehrhafte Mannlichkeit). In the period of the Wars of Liberation between 1813 and 1815, the press and topical literature teemed with similar phrases and cultivated a veritable cult of manliness. A new breed of “patriotically”-minded, “combat-ready” men was needed if, as intended, a “people's army” of conscripts was to fight a successful “national war” against France. This phenomenon has generated scant interest in the extensive historical literature about the time between 1806 and 1815, which is considered as the birth period of the German national movement.

The article is devoted to the formation of republican and imperial emblems of the late 18th — early 19th centuries. in France, an important element of which was the state seal. A complete break with the heraldic tradition of the Old Order ended not in 1789, but in 1792 in connection with the overthrow of the monarchy. In August 1792, the National Convention approved a new state seal, which was used until 1804 with minor changes. The central element of the seal — the allegory of Liberty in the image of a woman was a well-known visual representation of the image of France from the very beginning of the Revolution, but in September 1792 it for the first time acquires the official status of a state emblem. The author shows how the revolutionary leaders made attempts to replace this image with others, wanting to emphasize the radical break and aspects of their political program. The projects of 1793 by Jean-Louis David and 1796 by Henri Gregoire differed significantly from each other. But the decree on the state seal of 1793, according to which the image of Liberty should be replaced by the image of Hercules, was not put into practice, and Gregoire’s proposals were completely rejected. On the basis of elements of revolutionary emblematic and neoclassical heraldic designs, in June — July 1804, a new state seal of the empire was created, the central elements of which are a golden eagle on an azure field and the image of Napoleon sitting on a throne in imperial insignia. The author emphasizes that the Napoleonic system of heraldic representation was originally conceived by Bonaparte and his advisers as an important political resource.

Rather than renouncing empire after the fall of Napoleon, this essay argues, French liberal thinkers expressed a sustained preference for a strategy based on transnational connections, or what imperial historians describe as informal imperialism. The eulogy of European Christian civilization exemplified by François Guizot's lecture at the Sorbonne in 1828 served not only to legitimize French global ambitions, but also to facilitate cooperation with other European imperial powers, especially Britain, and indigenous collaborators. Liberal enthusiasm for the spread of Western civilization also inspired the emergence of a French version of free-trade imperialism, of which the economist Michel Chevalier proved a consistent advocate. Only when such aspirations were frustrated did liberals reluctantly endorse colonial conquest, on an exceptional basis in Algeria after 1840 and on a global scale after 1870. The allegedly abrupt liberal conversion to empire in the nineteenth century may instead be construed as a tactical shift from informal to formal dominance.

Introduction. After becoming emperor of France in 1804, Napoleon Bonaparte had to solve an extremely difficult geopolitical situation: the old European monarchies were in no hurry to recognize the legitimacy of the newly-made emperor’s power, so France had to act not only by force of arms, but also by demonstrating the effectiveness of the new order by creating model states located in Germany and becoming a showcase. One of these model states was the Grand Duchy of Berg, formed on the territory of the former duchies of Cleves and Berg in 1806. Napoleon sends his officials to the young duchy, actively carries out reforms for the development of the economy, the social sphere, as well as reforms of the army. Materials and methods. Newly formed military contingents recruited on the territory of the states were to take part in the conflicts of the first quarter of the XIX century, and the Grand Duchy of Berg was no exception. Analysis. The article considers the reflection of the participation of the Berg infantry in the Napoleonic Wars from 1807 to 1814 on the pages of the field diary of sergeant and then lieutenant of the 1st Infantry Regiment of the Grand Duchy of Berg P. Zimmermann. Attention is focused on the perception of Spaniards and Russians by German soldiers, on the image of the war as a whole based on the diary mentioned above. The images drawn by Zimmermann are ambivalent at first: he pays tribute to the courage, perseverance and patriotism of the Guerilliers, complains about cruelty and excesses, condemns looting by soldiers of allied units. Result. The tragic fate of the Berg contingent in Russia leads the author of the diary to speculate about good and evil, about combat brotherhood, about the senselessness of losses, the brutality of the Cossacks, the ingratitude of German civil officials. But the leitmotif of the whole narrative is the glorification of the honor of Berg’s soldiers and officers, who did not lose their dignity in the most dangerous and difficult situations.

AbstractThis article argues that the early nineteenth century was a critical period in the development of operatic aesthetics in France: fuelled by post-Revolutionary notions about theatre's importance in processes of nation-building, the Opéra sought to strengthen its reputation as the ‘Académie that unites all the arts’. The intertwinement of this aesthetic and political aim is conspicuous in the production of Jean-François Le Sueur's Ossian ou les bardes (1804), loosely based on James Macpherson's Ossianic ‘translations’. The work's meticulous coordination of the arts sought to bring third-century bardic society back to life and make audiences feel part of this long-forgotten, supposedly ‘historical’ and French, past. Thus, this article points to the Opéra's intensifying interaction with nationalism and genealogical historiography around 1800 as it sought to define its role as a national theatre. It also challenges the common scholarly notion that the Opéra's productions served primarily to aggrandise Napoleon.

In this study, the author must focus on legal and social issues that interact with law at the regional (local), national, regional, and international levels. This is to determine the extent to which legislation meets philosophical, sociological, and juridical values. we know that Indonesia is a country that adheres to the European Continental legal system or Civil Law, actually this system came from the Netherlands which at that time colonized Indonesia for more than 350 years, at that time the Dutch laid the legal foundation "Civil Law" is the oldest legal system and most influential in the world. This legal system stems from the Roman-German tradition. Around the 450th century BC, the Roman Empire made their first set of written rules called the "Twelve Tables of Rome". This Roman legal system spread to various parts of the world along with the expansion of the Roman Empire. This legal system was later codified by Emperor Justinus in the 6th century. The Corpus Juris Civilis was completed in 534 AD. When Europe began to have its own government, Roman law was used as the basis of the national laws of each country. Napoleon Bonaparte in France with its Napoleonic Code in 1804 and Germany with its Civil Code in 1896.

The author focuses on the first mass mobilisation in Prussia carried out by the Prussian government during the Liberation Wars of 1813–1815. He aims to answer the question of how successful this mobilisation was and whether the Prussian political elite managed to obtain the popular support for the war against Napoleonic France. Methodologically, the study is based on the theory of modernisation, according to which, during the Napoleonic Wars, universal conscription was introduced in the countries of Europe and modern mass warfare emerged. The introduction deals with the general causes prompting the government of the Prussian King Frederick William III to introduce the universal conscription in Prussia in the spring of 1813. The author pays attention is paid to the military reforms conducted by Gerhard von Scharnhorst, Hermann von Boyen and other reformers. He focuses on legislative acts of March and April 1813 which laid the foundation for the mass mobilisation in Prussia, namely. royal decrees abolishing all exemptions from the military service and establishing voluntary detachments or the Prussian National Militia (Landwehr and Landsturm). The author also analyses the social and provincial origin of those who were mobilised in the Prussian army. In the second part of the article, he considers the organisation of the patriotic propaganda which was indispensable for the mass mobilisation. To this end, he examines official governmental proclamations, newspaper articles, pamphlets, leaflets, brochures, political lyrics, and sermons. He emphasises that not only men were supposed to be mobilised for the needs of war but women as well. He concludes that the first mass mobilisation in Prussia in 1813–1815 turned out to be highly successful and effective. The Prussian government managed to mobilise large groups of people within a very short period of time. The universal conscription became law in 1814, and the pantheon of national heroes who died for the freedom of the Fatherland was created. The massive public support for the war against Napoleon significantly contributed to Prussia's rapid rise to the leading power among all German states.

Based on the analysis of the poem by G.R. Derzhavin “Hymn lyric-epic on driving out the French from the Fatherland”, the article demonstrates how this text predicted the changes in the state rhetoric and ideology of the Russian Empire in 1813–1815. Creating this text as an ideological poem and developing the motive of the Russian people there, Derzhavin left the civil understanding of it widespread in poetry during the Patriotic War in which people are recognized as an autonomous figure in history, independent of either the tsar or God and gave the motive a biblical dimension: opposition of Russia and France are compared to the ontological battle of divine and demonic forces. In “Hymn lyric-epic …” the idea of messianism of the Russian people sounds louder than in other modern poems. Moreover, Derzhavin's poem was one of the first, in which the plot of the Patriotic War of 1812 is clearly, voluminously and consistently set out: from the awakening of Napoleon (“Dragon or the serpentine demon”) to the final triumph of the Russians chosen by God and led by the archangel-like Mikhail Kutuzov, and the flight of the French emperor from the borders of the Russian Empire.

The paper presents the results of a study of the impact of large-scale historical events on significant changes in the legal field. Today, an event of such a scale is the war waged by the Russian Federation against Ukraine, which, after the undoubted defeat of the Russian Federation in many spheres, will have significant consequences, including in the legal sphere. The war in Ukraine has all the signs of an event of aglobal scale. Socio-political events in the turning points of history are at the same timethe source of development in the legal sphere. This trend can be observed at almost all historical stages, and therefore research in this direction is an urgent problem. The purpose of the paper is to study the impact of significant events in certain turning points in Modern and Recent history that took place on the European continent, which were the origin of changes in the legal sphere and had a long-term eff ect. Sinceit is currently impossible to predict exactly what changes will occur after the defeat of the Russian Federation, which legal institutions and in what direction they will apply, what consequences such changes will lead to in interstate relations and within the country, the above consideration is limited only to some historical events, which can be considered as an example of the origins of significant changes in the legal sphere of a doctrinal nature. The socio-political events in Europe in the XVII centuries, the results of the Thirty Years' War and the significance of the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 in terms of influencing the development of legal doctrine of New history is analyzed. Thirty Years 'War in Europe in the XVII century ended with the signing in 1648 at the same time in Münster and Osnabrück peace treaty, which was called the Peace of Westphalia in1648. It is emphasized that the Peace of Westphalia contains a number of provisions of a doctrinal nature. This treaty was the source of modern international law and had along-term impact on the development of relations between states. Large-scale historical events of the late 18th - early 19th centuries in Europe are undoubtedly associated with France. This is the Great French Revolution of 1789-1794, this is also the period of the Napoleonic Wars, finally, this includes the Vienna Congress of 1814-1815, at which, after the defeat of Napoleonic France, the winners under the slogan of returning to the continent of peace and tranquility and the desire to restore monarchies redrawn the continental political map of Europe. The lawmaking activity of Napoleon is noted, on whose initiative and under his leadership alarge volume of codification works was carried out. Civil (1804), Commercial (1807), Criminal Procedure (1808) and Criminal (1810) codes were adopted. It is noted that French civil law and the principles implemented by it significantly influenced civil-lawrelations in Europe. In modern history during the 20th century events took place, the result of which were changes aimed at preventing the horrors of the First and Second World Wars in the future. But the creation of the relevant institutions, organizations, legal framework and other factors was not enough to prevent the threat of a new world conflict, to guarantee danger not only for Ukraine, but also for the whole world. In the light of the events in Ukraine, based on historical analogies, a conclusion is made about the expectation of significant changes in the legal sphere for future security in the world and in our country. Key words: Aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine, origins of law,historical analogies, Peace of Westphalia, French Civil Code.

Historians usually portray theCongress ofViennain a European frame—and rightly so. The actors and the diplomatic flashpoints spanned the European continent, and the negotiations began before and continued after the Congress. The rulers and statesmen had already started parleying and planning the reconstruction of Europe as they followed behind the armies in the campaigns of 1813–1814, a process that continued while making peace with France in Paris in the spring of 1814, and amid the mixed celebrations and conversations during their visit to London that summer. Even the Congress, successful as it generally was, did not clear all the outstanding issues, which instead carried over into the discussions surrounding the Second Peace of Paris after Napoleon's renewed defeat at Waterloo in 1815 and into the ambassadors' conferences in Paris and London in succeeding years. Yet, there were good reasons why Vienna was selected as the venue for the main round of celebrations and negotiations in autumn 1814, and the location did help shape both the Congress and its diplomatic outcomes. Less often treated as a subject in its own right, however, is the question of what the Vienna Congress meant for and revealed about the history of the Habsburg monarchy, in European context to be sure, but with the focus on Austrian politics and society rather than on their contribution to the European narrative.

Lorsque Napoléon quitte l’île d’Elbe pour revenir en France et reprendre le pouvoir, de nouveau, il doit faire face à l’Europe en armes. Louis XVIII n’ayant pas été en mesure de reconstituer l’armée, Napoléon doit s’attaquer à cette tâche. Il envisage donc de mobiliser tous les hommes valides. La conscription est de nouveau proclamée. Mais déjà, malgré l’enthousiasme général, Napoléon doit faire face à un problème de taille. L’argent manque pour payer les fournitures. Afin de faire face aux impératifs financiers que nécessite une telle mobilisation, il a prévu un budget de 400 millions de francs. Toutefois, le budget de l’État étant de 618 millions, il se doit d’envisager d’autres sources de financements. L’emprunt, bien qu’il répugne à employer ce genre d’expédient, est la seule solution pour atteindre les objectifs qu’il s’est fixé. En ce sens, un règlement d’emprunt forcé de 150 millions est présenté aux Chambres. Tous les contribuables doivent y souscrire pour une somme équivalente au montant de leurs taxes foncières et mobilières. Bien sûr, ce projet n’est pas très approprié pour faire augmenter la popularité du régime, mais comme par les années passées, Napoléon espère que la victoire atténuera ces aspects négatifs. En attendant, ayant été obligé d’émettre des reconnaissances de dettes et de payer les fournisseurs avec des bons du Trésor pour mobiliser 449 000 soldats, Napoléon fait passer la dette publique de la France de 123 millions à 639 millions de francs. Comme l’a si bien écrit Pierre Branda, ce sont les Cent-Jours les plus coûteux de l’histoire de la France.

Recent literature in International Relations has argued that the absence of ‘balancing’ behaviour by European states during the Napoleonic Wars from 1798 to 1815 calls into question current explanations for the presence or absence of such behaviour in international relations. This literature has argued that: (1) Napoleonic France presented a significant threat to the stability of the international system; (2) European states did not balance against this threat from 1798 to 1813, and subsequently balanced only after Napoleon's defeat in Russia in 1812; (3) members of the system possessed adequate power to balance successfully against this threat; and (4) since European states engaged in co-opting, rewarding, avoiding, or bandwagoning behaviour towards the French threats to the system, a new explanation for the absence of balancing behaviour is required. Each of these four points can be refuted by: taking a longer time perspective of the international system during the period in question, expanding state motives to include interests other than security, using a long cycle model of coalition leadership by a global leader, recognizing the constraints faced by European states in their choices of balancing or bandwagoning behaviour under threats from France, and taking into account the role of innovation and change in a period of global war.

This study addresses the collaboration of the stage designer Ignazio Degotti (1758–1824) with the choreographer Pierre Gardel (1758–1840) in a series of works presented at the Théâtre de l’Opéra in Paris during the Napoleonic administration (1804–1815). Backstage episodes in three key performances demonstrate that although the Opéra was politically crucial to Napoleon, there were practical problems in theatre management on his watch. This study argues that the inadequacy of spaces for artistic creation and a lack of coordination among the creative team were the most pressing issues in this respect.

This article challenges the notion of French “influence.” It traces a network of like-minded reformers in France and the Balkans that came together in the early nineteenth century to further popular education. Examining interactions between actors in a cultural, scientific, and political center (France) and their allies on the periphery (in present-day Greece and Romania), the article reassesses these relationships, revealing the extent to which French individuals and organizations depended on such partnerships. Conceiving of joint Franco-Balkan reform agendas as programs of development, it offers a model and a vocabulary for the study of French soft power in post-Napoleonic Europe.

Résumé Fondé sur une étude des caricatures politiques publiées en France en 1814-1815, cet article met en valeur la permanence d'un langage graphique qui associe les signes iconographiques traditionnels de la France d'Ancien Régime (couronne, fleur de lys, sceptre, par exemple) et les nouveautés issues de la Révolution (France coiffée du bonnet de la Liberté). Pendant l'intermède drolatique des Cent-Jours, un nouveau signe apparaît, l'éteignoir inventé par les bonapartistes pour stigmatiser la monarchie restaurée, règne de l'obscurité qui étouffe les lumières du xvme siècle et de la Révolution. La France est présentée comme la victime de ce combat des chefs. This subject, an important aspect of cultural history as well as the history of political images, examines the struggle between the impérial power of Napoléon lst and Louis XVTJIth, by studying political caricatures produced during the years 1814 and 1815. Many political symbols proceed from the old régime culture, ôthers belong tô the revolutionary times but there is a novelty, the « éteignoir », an old fashioned cap, pointing out the darkness of the' restaured Bourbons monarchy. Finally, France is the great victim of thèse royal struggle.

AbstractThe nucleus of the collection of paintings in the Mauritshuis around 130 pictures - came from the hereditary stadholder Prince William v. It is widely believed to have become, the property of the State at the beginning of the 19th century, but how this happened is still. unclear. A hand-written notebook on this subject, compiled in 1876 by - the director Jonkheer J. K. L. de Jonge is in the archives of the Mauritshuis Note 4). On this basis a clnsor systematic and chronological investigation has been carried out into the stadholder's. property rights in respect of his collectcons and the changes these underwent between 1795 and 1816. Royal decrees and other documents of the period 1814- 16 in particular giae a clearer picture of whal look place. 0n 18 January 1795 William V (Fig. 2) left the Netherlands and fled to England. On 22 January the Dutch Republic was occupied by French armies. Since France had declared war on the stadholder, the ownership of all his propergy in the Netherlands, passed to France, in accordance with the laws of war of the time. His famous art collections on the Builerth of in. The Hague were taken to Paris, but the remaining art objects, distributed over his various houses, remained in the Netherlands. On 16 May 1795 the French concluded a treaty with the Batavian Republic, recognizing it as an independent power. All the properties of William v in the Netehrlands but not those taken to France, were made over to the Republic (Note 14), which proceeded to sell objects from the collections, at least seven sales taking place until 1798 (Note 15). A plan was then evolved to bring the remaining treasures together in a museum in emulation of the French. On the initiative of J. A. Gogel, the Nationale Konst-Galerij', the first national museum in the .Netherlands, was estahlished in The Hague and opened to the public on ,31 May 1800. Nothing was ever sold from lhe former stadholder's library and in 1798 a Nationale Bibliotheek was founded as well. In 1796, quite soon after the French had carried off the Stadholder, possessions to Paris or made them over to the Batavian Republic, indemnification was already mentioned (Note 19). However, only in the Trealy of Amiens of 180 and a subaequent agreement, between France ararl Prussia of 1 802, in which the Prince of Orarage renounced his and his heirs' rights in the Netherlands, did Prussia provide a certain compensation in the form of l.artds in Weslphalia and Swabia (Note 24) - William v left the management of these areas to the hereditary prince , who had already been involved in the problems oncerning his father's former possessions. In 1804 the Balavian Republic offered a sum of five million guilders 10 plenipotentiaries of the prince as compensation for the sequestrated titles and goods, including furniture, paintings, books and rarities'. This was accepted (Notes 27, 28), but the agreement was never carried out as the Batavian Republic failed to ratify the payment. In the meantime the Nationale Bibliolkeek and the Nationale Konst-Galerij had begun to develop, albeit at first on a small scale. The advent of Louis Napoleon as King of Hollarad in 1806 brought great changes. He made a start on a structured art policy. In 1806 the library, now called `Royal', was moved to the Mauritshuis and in 1808 the collectiorts in The Hague were transferred to Amsterdam, where a Koninklijk Museum was founded, which was housed in the former town hall. This collection was subsequertly to remain in Amsterdam, forming the nucleus of the later Rijksmuseum. The library too was intended to be transferred to Amsterdam, but this never happened and it remained in the Mauritshuis until 1819. Both institutions underwent a great expansion in the period 1806-10, the library's holdings increasing from around 10,000 to over 45,000 books and objects, while the museum acquired a number of paintings, the most important being Rembrandt's Night Watch and Syndics, which were placed in the new museum by the City of Amsterdam in 1808 (Note 44). In 1810 the Netherlands was incorporated into France. In the art field there was now a complete standstill and in 1812 books and in particular prints (around 11,000 of them) were again taken from The Hague to Paris. In November 1813 the French dominion was ended and on 2 December the hereditary prince, William Frederick, was declared sovereign ruler. He was inaugurated as constitutional monarch on 30 March 1814. On January 3rd the provisional council of The Hague had already declared that the city was in (unlawful' possession of a library, a collection of paintings, prints and other objects of art and science and requested the king tot take them back. The war was over and what had been confiscated from William under the laws of war could now be given back, but this never happened. By Royal Decree of 14 January 1814 Mr. ( later Baron) A. J. C. Lampsins (Fig. I ) was commissioned to come to an understanding with the burgomaster of The Hague over this transfer, to bring out a report on the condition of the objects and to formulate a proposal on the measures to be taken (Note 48). On 17 January Lampsins submitted a memorandum on the taking over of the Library as the private property of His Royal Highness the Sovereign of the United Netherlartds'. Although Lampsins was granted the right to bear the title 'Interim Director of the Royal Library' by a Royal Decree of 9 February 1814, William I did not propose to pay The costs himself ; they were to be carried by the Home Office (Note 52). Thus he left the question of ownership undecided. On 18 April Lampsins brought out a detailed report on all the measures to be taken (Appendix IIa ) . His suggestion was that the objects, formerly belonging to the stadholder should be removed from the former royal museum, now the Rijksmuseum, in Amsterdam and to return the 'Library', as the collectiort of books, paintings and prints in The Hague was called, to the place where they had been in 1795. Once again the king's reaction was not very clear. Among other things, he said that he wanted to wait until it was known how extensive the restitution of objects from Paris would be and to consider in zvhich scholarly context the collections would best, fit (Note 54) . While the ownership of the former collections of Prince William I was thus left undecided, a ruling had already been enacted in respect of the immovable property. By the Constitution of 1814, which came into effect on 30 March, the king was granted a high income, partly to make up for the losses he had sulfered. A Royal Decree of 22 January 1815 does, however, imply that William had renounced the right to his, father's collections, for he let it be known that he had not only accepted the situation that had developed in the Netherlands since 1795, but also wished it to be continued (Note 62). The restitution of the collections carried off to France could only be considered in its entirety after the defeat of Napoleon at the Battle of Waterloo on 18 June 1815- This was no simple matter, but in the end most, though not all, of the former possessions of William V were returned to the Netherlands. What was not or could not be recovered then (inc.uding 66 paintings, for example) is still in France today (Note 71)- On 20 November 1815 127 paintings, including Paulus Potter's Young Bull (Fig. 15), made a ceremonial entry into The Hague. But on 6 October, before anything had actually been returned, it had already been stipulated by Royal Decree that the control of the objects would hence forlh be in the hands of the State (Note 72). Thus William I no longer regarded his father's collections as the private property of the House of Orange, but he did retain the right to decide on the fulure destiny of the... painting.s and objects of art and science'. For the time being the paintings were replaced in the Gallery on the Buitenhof, from which they had been removed in 1795 (Note 73). In November 1815 the natural history collection was made the property of Leiden University (Note 74), becoming the basis for the Rijksmuseum voor Natuurlijke Historie, The print collection, part of the Royal Library in The Hague, was exchanged in May 1816 for the national collectiort of coins and medals, part of the Rijksmuseum. As of 1 Jufy 1816 directors were appointed for four different institutions in The Hague, the Koninklijke Bibliotheek (with the Koninklijk Penningkabinet ) , the Koninklijk Kabinet van Schilderijen and the Yoninklijk Kabinet van Zeldzaamheden (Note 80) . From that time these institutions led independenl lives. The king continued to lake a keen interest in them and not merely in respect of collecting Their accommodation in The Hague was already too cramped in 1816. By a Royal Decree of 18 May 1819 the Hotel Huguetan, the former palace of the. crown prince on Lange Voorhout, was earmarked for the Koninklijke Bibliotheek and the Koninklijk Penningkabinet (Note 87) . while at the king's behest the Mauritshuis, which had been rented up to then, was bought by the State on 27 March 1820 and on IO July allotted to the Koninklijk Kabinet van Schilderijen and the Koninklijk Kabinet van Zeldzaamheden (Note 88). Only the Koninklijk Kabinet van Schilderijen is still in the place assigned to it by William and the collection has meanwhile become so identified with its home that it is generally known as the Mauritshui.s'. William i's most important gift was made in July 1816,just after the foundation of the four royal institutions, when he had deposited most of the objects that his father had taken first to England and later to Oranienstein in the Koninklijk Kabinet van Zeldzaamheden. The rarities (Fig. 17), curios (Fig. 18) and paintings (Fig. 19), remained there (Note 84), while the other art objects were sorted and divided between the Koninklijke Bibliotheek (the manuscripts and books) and the koninklijk Penningkabinet (the cameos and gems) (Note 85). In 1819 and 182 the king also gave the Koninklijke Bibliotheek an important part of the Nassau Library from the castle at Dillenburg. Clearly he is one of the European monarchs who in the second half of the 18th and the 19th century made their collectiorts accessible to the public, and thus laid the foundatinns of many of today's museums. But William 1 also made purchases on behalf of the institutions he had created. For the Koninklijke Bibliotheek, for example, he had the 'Tweede Historiebijbel', made in Utrecht around 1430, bought in Louvain in 1829 for 1, 134 guilders (Pigs.30,3 I, Note 92). For the Koninkijk Penningkabinet he bought a collection of 62 gems and four cameos , for ,50,000 guilders in 1819. This had belonged to the philosopher Frans Hemsterhuis, the keeper of his father's cabinet of antiquities (Note 95) . The most spectacular acquisition. for the Penninukabinet., however, was a cameo carved in onyx, a late Roman work with the Triumph of Claudius, which the king bought in 1823 for 50,000 guilders, an enormous sum in those days. The Koninklijk Kabinet van Zeldzaamhedert also received princely gifts. In 1821- the so-called doll's house of Tzar Peter was bought out of the king's special funds for 2.800 guilders (Figs.33, 34, ,Note 97) , while even in 1838, when no more money was available for art, unnecessary expenditure on luxury' the Von Siebold ethnographical collection was bought at the king's behest for over 55,000 guilders (Note 98). The Koninklijk Kabinel van Schilderyen must have been close to the hearl of the king, who regarded it as an extension of the palace (Notes 99, 100) . The old master paintings he acquzred for it are among the most important in the collection (the modern pictures, not dealt with here, were transferred to the Paviljoen Welgelegen in Haarlem in 1838, Note 104). For instance, in 1820 he bought a portrait of Johan Maurice of Nassau (Fig.35)., while in 1822, against the advice of the then director, he bought Vermeer' s View of Delft for 2,900 guilders (Fig.36, Note 105) and in 1827 it was made known, from Brussels that His Majesty had recommended the purchase of Rogier van der Weyden's Lamentation (Fig.37) . The most spectacular example of the king's love for 'his' museum, however, is the purchase in 1828 of Rembrandt's Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp for 32,000 guilders. The director of the Rijksmuseum, C. Apostool, cortsidered this Rembrandt'sfinest painting and had already drawn attention to it in 1817, At the king'.s behest the picture, the purchase of which had been financed in part by the sale of a number of painlings from. the Rijksmuseum, was placed in the Koninklijk Kabinet van Schilderijen in The Hague. On his accession King William I had left the art objects which had become state propery after being ceded by the French to the Batavian Republic in 1795 as they were. He reclaimed the collections carried off to France as his own property, but it can be deduced from the Royal Decrees of 1815 and 1816 that it Was his wish that they should be made over to the State, including those paintings that form the nucleus of the collection in the Mauritshuis. In addition, in 1816 he handed over many art objects which his father had taken with him into exile. His son, William II, later accepted this, after having the matter investigated (Note 107 and Appendix IV). Thus William I'S munificence proves to have been much more extensive than has ever been realized.

The following article focuses on the Rhineland, and more specifically, the region on the left (or west) bank of the Rhine bounded in the north and west by the Low Countries and France. This German-speaking region was occupied by the armies of revolutionary France after 1792. De jure annexation followed the Treaty of Lunéville (1801), and French rule lasted until 1814. Most of the Rhineland was awarded in 1815 to Prussia and remained a constituent part until after the Second World War. The Rhineland experienced Napoleonic rule first hand. Its four departments—the Roër, Rhin-et-Moselle, Sarre, and Mont-Tonnerre—were treated like the others in metropolitan France, and it is this status that makes the region distinct in German-speaking Europe. This had consequences both in the Napoleonic period and in the century that followed the departure of the last French soldier. This alone would constitute sufficient reason for studying the region. More broadly, however, the Rhenish experience in the French period sheds light on the much broader phenomena of state formation and nation building. Before 1792, the Rhenish political order appeared in many respects a throwback to the late Middle Ages. Extreme territorial fragmentation, city states, church states, and mini states distinguished its landscape. These survived the early-modern period thanks in part to Great Power rivalry and the protective mantle provided by the Holy Roman Empire. Then, suddenly, came rule by France which, in the form of the First Republic and Napoleon's First Empire, represented the most demanding state the world had seen up to that point. This state imposed itself on a region unused to big government. It might be thought that bitter confrontation would have resulted. Yet, and here is a paradox this article wishes to address, many aspects of French rule gained acceptance in the region, and defense of the Napoleonic legacy formed a component of the “Rhenish” identity that came into being in the nineteenth century.

A PROPOSAL TO ESTABLISH A COUNCIL OF STATE IN POLAND Summary In 2006 Janusz Kochanowski, Poland’s Civil Rights Spokesman, put forward a proposal for the establishment of a council of state. The idea itself is not new, and goes back to the Napoleonic Conseil d’État. A council of state operated on Polish territories in the 19th century, when the country was partitioned and under foreign rule, during the brief spell under the Duchy of Warsaw controlled by Napoleonic France (1807-1815), and subsequently in the so-called Kingdom of Poland under Russian rule (1815-1831, 1833-1845, 1861-1867). Nowadays councils of state operate in France, Holland, Italy, and Belgium. Their primary tasks are judicial and consultative, as a supreme administrative court. Kochanowski’s proposal envisaged a council of state empowered to issue its opinion on prospective legislation at the draft bill stage. It was to have a president and a membership of 15 counsellors elected by Sejm for a 9-year term of office. Only candidates with the required juridical and/or academic qualifications would be eligible to stand for this office.

<p><strong>Abstract.</strong> An important phenomenon in cartography in the 19th Century is the emergence of thematic cartography and especially distribution maps. The latter represent the spatial distribution of a particular feature in an area. Distribution maps may be qualitative such as those representing the land use or land cover, geological maps, … or also quantitative, such as maps representing the population distribution by dots or isolines.</p><p> Even if in the 18th C. (or even earlier), some thematic maps were drawn, the real development of the thematic mapping only started in the 19th C. In cartographic literature, large attention was paid to the cholera map of Snow from 1854. It has often been cited (also in geographical information science) as an example of early spatial analysis; what he visually did is today a well-known technique and methodology of buffer analysis in GIS. But the most impressive thematic maps are the early 19th C. chronostratigraphical maps, mostly described as geological maps. This type of inventory maps - important till the end of the 20th C. &amp;ndash; are now completely substituted by digital data.</p><p> If the development of thematical maps was an answer on one hand to industrialisation and changing ideas about the concept of richness, it was on the other hand also only made possible by the development of new printing techniques. Belgium was a forerunner in realizing geological maps. Already in the Dutch period (1815&amp;ndash;1830) systematic field observations were executed in the southern part of Belgium. In this period a map was realized representing ore deposits (“<i>Geologische kaart van een gedeelte der Nederlanden</i>”), under the direction of J.E. Van Gorkum, with scientific input by professor Van Breda; the map was published in the Netherlands in 1834, after Belgian independency.</p><p> The map is also interesting from another point of view as it is representing the triangulation network the Dutch established in Belgium before 1830 in the framework of the Military Reconnaissance. They were part of a systematic mapping project under supervision of the Topographical Bureau with a section responsible for the Northern provinces and one for the Southern provinces, which realized those Military Reconnaissance maps. Captain Erzey executed a triangulation over the southern provinces. Later on, those coordinates served Vander Maelen to realize his 1&amp;thinsp;:&amp;thinsp;20&amp;thinsp;000 and 1&amp;thinsp;:&amp;thinsp;80&amp;thinsp;000 topographical mapping of Belgium.</p><p> On the one hand, the awareness that a new and a more precise surveying and cartography was needed and on the other hand that inventories of different thematic data were needed, must be seen not only in the context of industrialization but also in the change of the role of landownership in the society through the ages.</p><p> In the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, the landownership was a synonym for richness. The land-owners (abbeys, noblemen, …) could collect taxes based on this ownership (the so-called taxation paradigm). In the 19th Century, land also became a good that could be traded. The trading land also induced a need for a stricter legal framework. In France, typically Napoleon erected not only the Cadastre Law to partition the tax collection more fairly but he also mentioned “<i>Un bon cadastre parcellaire sera le complément de mon code en ce qui concerne la possession du sol. Il faut que les plans soient assez exacts et assez développés pour servir à fixer les limites des propriétés et empêcher les procès.</i>” (“<i>A good land cadastre will be the complement of my code regarding the ownership of the soil. Maps must be accurate enough and developed enough to set property boundaries and prevent lawsuits</i>”) (Letter of Napoleon to his Minister of Finance Mollien). This period when land also became a negotiable good fits in a so-called legal paradigm.</p><p> The land registry reform affecting the whole French Empire cannot be seen separately from the reform Napoleon wished to set up for his topographical maps. Napoleon established a commission that had to define the cartographic system of a new topographic map covering the French Empire. Even if the ellipsoid of Delambre and the Bonne projection were retained, the map production could never be launched. The measurements of Captain Erzey in the Dutch period can be considered as the first attempt (in Belgium) to map the territory on a geodetically correct basis.</p><p> During one and a half century the negotiable aspect of land was predominant. Map making was requiring the best available geometric accuracy. The needs of map making changed fundamentally when land also became scarcer, when it became a scarce good. The increasing need for planning in the second part of the 20th C. for the sake of land scarcity finally induced &amp;ndash; when techniques (in particular GIS) would allow it - the development of multi-purpose spatial data systems.</p></p>

The outburst of the Polish insurrection and its evolution attracted the attention of the European Powers, due to the international political context in which it started, that of the liberal-bourgeois revolutions in France, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal, and of the implications that were expected to occur due to power balance on the continent and in the Eastern Question. Russia’s position in the political systems mentioned above depended on how the Polish Question would be solved. By subordinating all the Kingdom of Poland, whose political individuality, in the Russian political and institutional system, in which the decisions of the „Final Act” of the Peace Congress in Vienna (June 9th 1815) placed it, was about to be abolished by the Tsar, opened to the Russian Empire the path towards the consolidation of its positions in the Baltic region, strategically, political an economical, thus upsetting the other Powers in the European political system, on one hand. And secondly, because it would have relieved it of the necessity to divide its forces to oversee the evolution of the embarrassing Polish Question and would have been capable to focus its attention on a solution to the other problem, the Eastern one. This perspective was likely to happen, especially in the conditions of the peace Treaty that Russia had imposed to Turkey, at Adrianople, on September 14th 1829, which ensured the latter’s „passivity” towards the Oriental policy of its victor. These perspectives affected, in particular, Great Britain and France, the secular rivals of Russia in that area, so they tried, using only diplomatic means because of the very complicated international situation at the beginning of the fourth decade of the nineteenth century, to determine Russia to adopt a more conciliatory attitude towards the Polish insurgents. The rivalries that aggravated the Franco-British relations, especially in Western Europe, prevented the two Powers to adopt a unitary position towards Russia, a fact that allowed the latter to dictate the law in the Kingdom of Poland. A position, in some way singular, towards the Polish Question was adopted by another state, with direct interests in the Baltic sea area and with more specific ones in the Eastern Question. It is the United Kingdom of Sweden and Norway, created in the letter and the spirit of the Swedish-Norwegian Convention from Moss, on August 14th 1814. Sweden’s internal and external political circumstances in which, in 1810, the famous marshal of Napoleon I, Jean Baptiste Sebastien Bernadotte, prince of Pontecorvo, was proclaimed crown prince under the name Karl Johan, King Karl XIV Johan, from 1818, as the creation of the Swedish-Norwegian personal Union, determined the Swedish-Norwegian diplomacy favor the Russian interests in the Polish Question as well as in the Eastern Question. In the Polish Question, the one under our analysis, this was also because the insurrection of November 1830 started in the international conditions mentioned above and due to the fact that the liberal internal opposition to the conservative and absolutist monarchical policy of King Karl XIV Johan was becoming more active and could have constituted a reason for the Norwegians to evade the personal Union, which they did not favor and against which they fought, first through arms then by institutional means. The forms in which Great Britain, France and Sweden took position in regard to the reprisal of the Polish insurrection of November 1830, very well documented by the diplomatic reports of the British diplomats in St. Petersburg and of the Swedish ones, accredited in Petersburg and in London, which we had the opportunity to consult in the funds of manuscripts of British Library, in London, and those of the National Archives of Sweden, in Stockholm, constitute, in our opinion, a contribution to the knowledge of the history of European diplomacy, on one hand, and to the research of the international relations in the first half of the nineteenth century, on another. This is the reason why we intend to approach them in this study. All the documents selected from Sveriges Riksarkivet, in Stockholm and cited in these pages are included in the volume X, part I, of the Collection “Europe and the Porte”, which is still in manuscript, for this reason we indicated the archive quotations.

Abstract: The Vienna system of international relations established at the Congress of Vienna in 1814-1815, was a real challenge for the French political elite during all subsequent decades. France was a defeated party and was thus morally humiliated. The objective for all French governments after 1815 was to improve the position of France in this new system of international relations, including due to the destabilization and breaking of the Vienna system. In the years of the Restoration in France (1814-1830) a major foreign policy action of the government of Louis XVIII was the intervention in Spain in 1823, which refers to the Spanish revolution of 1820-1823. The French government, reflecting the interests of the European reaction, had hoped to raise these military prestige of France, and consequently to raise the question of the revision of the treatises of Vienna of 1815. Despite the success of the intervention, she has not brought the big political dividends in France. After the July revolution 1830 in France, the foreign policy of France intensified. Leading French politicians defined quite clearly exclusive spheres of influence of France, and in 1832 the French troops invaded Central Italy, capturing the city of Ancona. In 1840, during the second Oriental crisis, the French government has opposed themselves to the rest of Europe for the first time since the Napoleonic wars. Ultimately, the strategic position of France in the middle East was weakened. But the exacerbation of international conflict contributed to the strengthening of the French army and Navy. Further successes of the French diplomacy will be linked to the period of the Second Empire in France, in particular, with the Crimean war, that raised has raised status of France, and the decision of the Italian question in the second half of the 60-ies of the XIX century.

This article examines a forgotten episode in the Napoleonic Wars: the Restoration government’s liquidation of claims from the Allied invasions of 1814 and 1815. While paying requisitions and reparations to the Allied powers, the new regime reimbursed its own subjects for debts – in taxes, requisitions, and damages – incurred by the previous regime. This indemnification was central to the monarchy’s strategy to restore its political and economic credit. Tracing the goals and mechanisms of this indemnification, the article argues that, though it succeeded in re-establishing the state’s financial credit, it exacerbated divisions between royalists and revolutionaries, thereby undermining its political stability.

The position of judges in the early constitutionalist era. – In the first two decades of the nineteenth century, the Southern German states complete their transition to a largely independent judicial system, which is reflected in the constitutions of the early constitutionalist era. Different lines of development can be seen to converge: the strengthening and establishment of a judicial system uninfluenced by politics in contrast to its former role as governing instrument in the second half of the eighteenth century, German Enlightenment thought and last but not least the strong influence exercised by Napoleonic France. The Southern German states could not lag behind all of this, even after 1815.

1813-1818 : the first occupation in the today period in France ; The foreign military occupations of 1813-1818 are the first of the contemporary era. The occupation of 1813-1814 is closely linked to the fightings and ended with the peace treaty of 1814. The other one has at first the same characteristics, but becomes later a guarantee occupation, organized according to the treaty of Paris of november 1815. In 1813-1814, the allied forces occupied mostly the North East and Center East of France, and also the South East. In 1815, most of the northern part of the country, except western Britanny, is occupied, but also all of the eastern boundaries areas. The diversity of the foreign troops reflects the coalitions maked up against the Napoleonic domination in Europe. German troops are the most numerous, but British and Russian units took also a large part during the occupations. Were also present Spanish, Portuguese, Danish and troops from the Netherlands. One mustn’t forget that units from central and eastern Europe, belonging to areas under Austrian or Russian domination also occupied France. Although violence was almost present during that period, it remained under control and it served mostly to control the populations and the country. In spite of that, the contacts between the troops and the civilians, which developed mutual knowledge between European people. Slowly, the figure of the Cossack replaced the Prussian one.

When the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Armies conquered most of Europe, they found unknown or hardly known plant and animal species. French naturalists, particularly the so-called agronomists led by botanists and zoologists, supported by the financial and political backing of the State, shaped an ambitious “Nature Policy”. They imported new species of plants and animals from the occupied territories to introduce them into France. The biological regeneration of French herds and agriculture was the main goal of this public policy. A unidirectional circulation from throughout the European continent towards France occurred from 1799 to 1815. But the continental blockade in 1806 cut off the supply of certain products and raw materials such as sugar, indigo and cotton. On a continental scale, in the most adapted parts of its Empire the Napoleonic State implemented an impressive policy of introducing and acclimatizing exotic plant species from many regions of the world. Many questions arise from this unprecedented circulation of plant and animal species within “French Europe”: How was it organised? On which circuits and networks did it rely? What was the role of the French state in that biological challenge? Finally, why were the results of that biological policy so disappointing?

Abstract: This work aims to highlight how, even in this particular territory closely linked to Paris and of which Napoleon was the sovereign, education became the object of significant reforms promoted by the political authorities. On one hand, these reforms intended to ensure a radical acceleration of the secularisation process of school education begun in Lombardy in the second half of the XVIIIth century, in turn fuel to the objectives that intended to add the basis of the principles of welfare also in this political domain. On the other hand, they aspired to root in the students adhesion to Bonaparte. As will be discussed later, this objective was pursued by encouraging students and teachers to engage themselves in writing encomiastic, flattering literary compositions, sometimes inspired by the most renowned literary works, which had to contribute to building the glorification of the monarch in the new political framework and which found a particular manifestation on the occasion of the birth of his male heir, the King of Rome, in 1811.

Four years after the French Revolution, in 1793 a series of wars among France and other major powers of Europe began and they lasted until 1815. There is disagreement among economic historians about the effects of these wars on the trend of US economic growth. This paper aims to answer the following question. Did America as a neutral nation take advantage of economic possibilities caused by Europe at war through trade? To put it differently, this paper questions whether there was an export-led growth due to the war. To answer this question, we re-examined the export-led growth hypothesis for the period 1790-1860 using the ARDL methodology. Based on this methodology, a cointegrated relationship is found among the variables of real GDP, labor, exports and exchange rates. The results suggest that the economic growth of the US was not export-driven. In addition, parallel to the results of unit root tests with structural breaks, the coefficient of the dummy variable was statistically significant in the long run, implying that the war did have a significant effect on the economic growth trend of the US.

Официальные праздники в годы французского завоевания Пьемонта имеют важное значение для понимания культурной политики Франции в Италии начала XIX века. Статья посвящена проблеме официальных коммемораций в землях бывшего Сардинского королевства в период с 1799 по 1814 г. В 1799–1802 гг. здесь торжественно отмечали годовщину казни Людовика XVI, день 14 июля, провозглашение Французской Республики 22 сентября, день победы в битве при Маренго 14 июня и день присоединения Пьемонта к Франции. Власти старались придать этим важным датам универсальный исторический характер, что играло важную роль в политике революционной аккультурации. После создания империи в 1804 г. политика медленно менялась: начиная с 1806 г. сразу четыре новых праздника были объединены. Ежегодно 15 августа праздновали день Святого Наполеона и заключение Конкордата, а в первое воскресенье декабря - годовщину коронации Наполеона и день победы в битве при Аустерлице. Необходимость легитимации и сакрализации новой династии Бонапартов привела к важным переменам. Имперское правительство и местные власти в департаментах проводили политику синтеза светских и церковных церемоний, пытались с помощью официальных коммемораций повлиять на общественные настроения, организовать единый цикл важных праздников с политическим подтекстом, что, однако, не привело к решительным сдвигам в общественном сознании пьемонтского народа. И более того, это было весьма негативно воспринято приходским духовенством и крестьянством, что не способствовало укреплению институтов наполеоновского государства в итальянских землях. Official holidays during the years of the French conquest of Piedmont are important for understanding the cultural policy of France in Italy at the beginning of the 19th century. The article is devoted to the problem of official commemorations in the lands of the former Sardinian kingdom in the period from 1799 to 1814. In 1799–1801 here they solemnly celebrated the anniversary of the execution of Louis XVI, the day of July 14, the proclamation of the French Republic on September 22, the day of victory in the Battle of Marengo on June 14 and the day of the annexation of Piedmont to France. The authorities tried to give these important dates a universal historical character, which played a significant role in the policy of revolutionary acculturation. After the creation of the empire in 1804, policies slowly changed: starting in 1806, four holidays were combined. Every year on August 15, St. Napoleon's Day and the conclusion of the Concordat were celebrated, and on the first Sunday in December, the anniversary of Napoleon's coronation and the day of victory in the Battle of Austerlitz. The need to legitimize and sacralize the new Bonaparte dynasty led to major changes. The imperial government and local authorities in the departments pursued a policy of synthesis of secular and church ceremonies, tried to influence public sentiment with the help of official commemorations, and organize a single cycle of important holidays with political overtones, which, however, did not lead to decisive changes in the public consciousness of the Piedmontese people. And moreover, this was very negatively perceived by the parish clergy and peasantry, which did not help strengthen the institutions of the Napoleonic state in the Italian lands.

The paper provides a comparative history of the economic impact of the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars. By focusing on the relative price evidence, it is possible to show that the conflict had major economic effects around the world. Britain’s control of the seas meant that it was much less affected than other belligerent nations, such as France and the United States. The fact that this conflict had such large price effects around the world suggests a highly inter-connected international economy, but is also consistent with the hypothesis that mercantilist conflicts prevented the emergence of more pronounced commodity market integration during the eighteenth century. The war had several longer-run effects which both helped and hindered the integration of international commodity markets during the nineteenth century.