BOOKS.
NAPOLEON.*
LOCKHART'S History of Napoleon Buonaparte, which has now been republished, was written, eight years after Napoleon's death. The book is eminently creditable to its author. When he wrote, the embers of the fire excited by the long Revolutionary Ware were still aglow, Bitter hatred of the French and execration of the memory of Napoleon were still living forces in English politics. Moreover, Lockhart did not belong to that section of English society which originally sympathized with the French Revolution, and some of whose members were most reluctant to admit that the advent of Napoleonic= had resulted in a transformation of French policy and French habits of thought as complete as that which has, in our days, been• caused by the substitution of Kaiserism for the lofty morality and philosophy which prevailed in Germany during the first half of the nineteenth century. On the contrary, as the editor of the Quarterly Review, and as the son-in-law of that staunch Tory and anti-Gallican, Sir Walter Scott, all Lockhart's associations and proclivities would, it may safely be assumed, have rendered him predisposed to pass a harsh judgment on the career and character of a man who had kept all Europe in a ferment for a couple of decades, and who, although far from being a genuine democrat, was, nevertheless, a whole-hearted iconoclast of Quarterly Review Toryism. But Lockhart did not allow his predis- positions, if any existed, to warp his judgment. Without permitting himself to be awed by the sinister genius of the man whose history he recounts, he does ample justice to the scope and versatility of Napoleon's unquestionable talents. His narrative is eminently fair. His conclusions indicate a strenuous effort to preserve a judicial calmness of mind. As a history, Lockhart's work has now become obsolete. Since he wrote, a voluminous Napoleonic literature has sprung into existence that, in many cases, throws much additional light on the events which he narrated. Dr. Holland Rose, in an instructive preface to the new edition, points out numerous inaccuracies of which Lockhart was guilty. His account of the Waterloo campaign is especially faulty. I may add that Anglo-Egyptians, however imperfect may be their knowledge of the Arabic language, will smile on learning that the right translation of " Sultan Kebir," by which name Napoleon was designated by the inhabitants of Egypt after the battle of the Pyramids, is " King of Fire." But, in spite of these defects, Lockhart's book was worth republishing and is worth reading. It recalls to the mind many of those pungent ana which are the delight of the Napoleonic: student, and which, whether profound or shallow, throw a vivid light on the character of the man who uttered them. Moreover, the work is interesting as an indication of the opinions entertained about Napoleon by a fair-minded Scotsman who was twenty-one years of age when the battle of Waterloo was fought.
The world is already familiar with the po opinions entertained by Napoleon during his callow youth, and a ith his early excursions into the field of literature. He wrote the S r de Beaucaire, a novel
entitled Lord Essex, and The Prophet's Mask, the last, M. Fournier has told us, being "in the style of Voltaire." He also composed a Dialogue on Lore, in which he expressed an opinion that " Love was injurious to society and to the happiness of the individual." He added, at a later period of his life, that he " had never been genuinely in love, except perhaps with Josephine, and then only because he was twenty- seven when he made her acquaintance." He also wrote a Parallel between Apollonius of Tyana and Jesus Christ, in which " he decided in favour of the Greek philosopher." When reminded of this composi- tion by his brother Lucien, he gave strict instructions that it was not to be mentioned, " as, if it became known, it might utterly undo the results of all his labours in effecting a pacification with the Roman Church." But these literary compositions did not stand alone. Lockhart says that, at an early age, Napoleon competed anonymously and successfully for a prize offered by the Academy of Lyons for the • The History of Napoleon Buottestark. By John Gibson Lockhart. With sat Introduction by J. Holland Rose,Litt.D. London : Humphrey Milford. 12s. net.] best answer to Raynal's question : " What are the principles and institutions by the application of which mankind can be raised to the highest happiness ?" Many years afterwards, Talleyrand, thinking to please his Sovereign, obtained the manuscript and- ave it to Napoleon. The latter "threw his eye over two or three pages and tossed it into the fire." The historical student and the psychologist alike owe the time-serving Minister a grudge for his action in this matter. It would be most interesting to know what views. Napoleon held in his youth as to the best methods for promoting human happiness. We are aware that in later life he thought that one method, which could profitably be adopted, was to crush out all opposition. When, as First Consul, ho was framing his sham Constitution, he informed one of his brothers, who urged the necessity of creating a Parliamentary Opposition on the English model, that he " had never yet seen the advantages of opposition of any kind." Lockhart reproduces a pasquinade which was placarded in the streets of Paris immediately after the issue of this Constitution. It gave what was probably a faithful representation of the views generally entertained by the Parisians on its merits. It ran as follows :—
" POLITICAL SUBTRACTION.
From 5 Directors Take 2 There remain 3 Consuls From them take 2 And there remains 1 BUONAPARTE."
Lockhart gives a very lucid and graphic account of those brilliant Italian campaigns which constitute one of the chief titles of Napoleon to fame as a great military commander. Their history possesses an undying interest which is not wholly due to the strategical and tactical skill displayed by Napoleon. The contrast in character between the energetic, resourceful, and wholly unconventional French leader and the stupid pedants who commanded the Austrian troops is most striking. The latter complained that they were opposed by a young general who irreverently neglected the acknowledged canons of sound strategy. A similar accusation was made against Nelson after he had won the battle of Trafalgar. A good illustration of Napoleon's restless energy is supplied by. Lockhart's account of his conduct when, in 1808, he arrived at Vittoria to assume the command of the French armies in Spain. " The civil and military authorities met him at the gate of the town, and would have conducted him to a house prepared for his reception, but he leapt from his horse, entered the first inn that he observed, and calling for maps and a detailed report of the position of all the armies, French and Spanish, proceeded instantly to draw up his plans for the prosecution of the war. Within two hours ho had completed his task." The words whioh Tacitus (Ann., IV. 13) uses about Tiberius aro highly applicable to Napoleon : " Nihil intermissa rerum cura, negotia pro solatiis aecipiens." Napoleon found relaxation in never-ending occupation.
In spite of Milton's qualified condemnation of a desire for that fame which he thought was the "last infirmity of noble mind," it is certain that personal ambition, if properly directed, far from being an infirmity, is a very meritorious moral attribute. Everything depends on the direction given to the ambitious effort. The most severe moralist would never think of condemning the spur which personal ambition gave to the actions of such men as Wellington, Nelson, or Abraham Lincoln. Even the conduct of Cavour and Bismarck is capable of defence, for though the methods adopted by each of these statesmen were reprehensible, the main objects which they sought to attain were legitimate and patriotic. The same cannot be said of Napoleon. From his earliest youth his conduct was wholly governed by that pernicious form of ambition which casts to the winds all moral considerations in the pursuit of purely personal aims. He discarded Corsican for French patriotism, not because he had any special sympathies for France, for, to the end of his days, he mocked at the inhabitants of his adopted country and regarded. them as his dupes, but because his cool and calculating intellect led him to the conclusion that France afforded a more favourable field than Corsica for the operations of a soldier of fortune. For similar reasons he abandoned the Royalist cause. If, he said towards the close of his life, " I had been a general, I might have adhered to the King ; being a subaltern, I joined the patriots." Ho felt no shame for the mendacity which distinguished him throughout the whole of his career, and of which he was frequently convicted. Napoleon, Mine. de R,emusat, who knew him well, said, " delighted in recording the fact that, when he was a child, one of his uncles predicted that he would govern the world some day because he was an habitual liar." In his ease, the child was father to the man. He cheated at cards, not because he wanted to win money, for De Bourrienne says he always returned whatever he had won unfairly, but because he liked to cheat. When he was First Consul, he prompted his brother Lucien to write a pamphlet urging him to assume the Imperial title, and then proposed that the author should be arrested and punished for having written it. When Lucien complained that " he had been made a puppet and then abandoned," Napoleon was not in the least abashed. " The fault is your own," ho said to his brother ; " it was your business not to be detected. Fouche [then Minister of Police] has shown himself more dexterous—so much the worse for you." A perfectly honest man, Mine. de Stahl said, " was the only kind of man he never could understand. Such a man perplexed and baffled his calculations, acting on them as a sign of the Cross acts on the machinations of a demon." He did not hesitate to forgo the honoured name of Kosciusko in issuing a Proclamation calling on the Poles to rise against Russia. He eventually fell, as Prussian absolutism is destined to fall, because, in spite of his acutely logical intellect and transcendent powers of organization, he altogether failed to recognize the moral and spiritual motives which guide individuals and nations. Ho could make Kings, conquer countries, or at all events their capitals, and shatter dynasties, but he could not cope with that fervent spirit of nationalism which his own successes evoked.
Napoleons are, fortunately, scarce. The military successes of Prussia have been due not so much to the genius of any one individual as to the regular and relentless working of a machine-made system. But Napoleonism, in a bad form, survives, and it is all the more pernicious inasmuch as at present it is not guided by statesmen possessing the talents of either a Napoleon or a Bismarck. It has been incorporated into the national mind and life of an entire people. Napoleon crushed the Prussians, but they have become the inheritors both of his principles . and his methods. They may be devoid of his talents, but they endeavour to emulate his proceedings. He was, if not the author, at all events one of the foremost apostles, of that " absolute war " which Prussian military and political writers regard as an ideal worthy of attainment. Lockhart records that Napoleon said : " A real Frenchman could not, should not, rest until the seas are free and open to all." Again, Ile said : " There must bo one Code, one Court of Appeal, and one coinage for Europe. The States of Europe must bo united into one nation, and Paris be its capital." The words are those of the dead Fronoh autocrat, but in reading them we seem to be hearkening to those of the living German Kaiser. Where the former failed, the latter will not succeed ; neither is it likely that any German Beranger will be able to invoke the Muse so successfully as to imbue future generations of Germans with a hardy belief in the magic of the Hohenzollern name.
CROMER.
Previous page
