The historians' history of the world in twenty-five volumes, volume 06 : $b the early Roman Empire
History
The historians' history of the world in twenty-five volumes, volume 06 : $b the early Roman Empire
World history
COMPARISON BETWEEN AUGUSTUS AND NAPOLEON III
Altogether there is a striking resemblance between these two rulers and
their times, although Napoleon III cannot be compared with Augustus so
far as their offices are concerned. On their first appearance on the
scene both were underrated by their opponents and laughed at on account
of their youth or their lack of understanding: Cicero joked about “the
boy”; Victor Hugo mocked at Napoleon the little. Both lived in periods
when their nation was stirred to the innermost depths by civil war and
revolution, in the confusion of which practically all landed property
had changed owners; in Italy through the proscriptions of the triumvirs
and the distribution of land to the veterans, in France through the
confiscation of the property of the clergy, through the sale of estates
of the nobility, combined with the mismanagement of the _assignats_ in
the first revolution, while there was fear of fresh changes through some
future social revolution.
The man who offered present occupiers guarantees for their occupation and
against the return of the previous confusion was honoured as the saviour
of society; upon him the nation poured its thanks for the economic
revival of the country and for increasing well-being during a long
succession of peaceful years.
Upon this firm basis was reared the throne of the new rulers, neither
of whom claimed to be a legitimate monarch. Both had with more or less
right acquired a dictatorial power which they understood how to wield
throughout many years, until at length a moment came when they made up
their minds to a partial renunciation of authority. This was the critical
moment that decided the fate of the rulers and their work, for everything
depended on the choice of the moment and the extent of the concessions.
Here the penetrating vision and the statesmanlike ability of Augustus are
seen to surpassing advantage, while Napoleon, who only made up his mind
after long hesitation, took his hand from the tiller reluctantly, only
to see very speedily with what scant success his ship battled against
the overpowering torrent and was driven helplessly nearer and nearer the
destruction that threatened it.
The rule of Augustus as well as that of Napoleon III was a tyranny in
the good sense of the word; neither the one nor the other lacked the
drop of democratic oil with which the ruler was anointed. Both wanted
to be assured that their high place was secure only because of its
necessity to the state. Again and again Augustus restored his power (to
all appearances at least) to the senate, to receive it again, but only
for a definite number of years; and even in the case of Napoleon III, it
was a polite official fiction that his power had been delegated to him by
the nation in the first year of his reign and was even in his last year
confirmed by a plebiscite.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account