Napoleon Iii

An Assessment of Whether forty winks Bonaparte or Louis pile Had More Significant Reforms in France both(prenominal) snooze Bonaparte and his nephew Louis short sleep Bonaparte were important rulers of France. They ru direct with great power and control, they implemented many a(prenominal) sweeping reforms and laws that greatly changed the course of cut and European life. catnap Bonaparte and Louis catnap, also referred to as Napoleon III, each directed France through many reforms under their rule.However, the leader with the more world-shattering reforms and impact on France was Napoleon III. Napoleon III had commodiouser steadfast reforms in the likes of rebuilding and modernizing Paris, constructing the French railway and veranda a strong French foreign policy that included the unification of Italy. He also led France through a period of prosperity and industrialization. Louis Napoleon Bonaparte was elected the president of France at period 40, and capped a quite rem arkable, and unlikely rise to power. Cavendish, 1998, para. 1). Louis Napoleon Bonaparte, named after his uncle Napoleon I, had never held a government position, nor had he even shown any sort of political capability, he rose to power hardly through widespread support in France that he was the rightful heir to Napoleon I. (Cavendish, 1998, para. 1,2). In essence, Louis Napoleon rode into control of France on the coattails of his uncle and then he took his uncles rule and furthered the reforms and French power.Louis Napoleon campaigned that he would counterpunch France back to the glory that they had erst had under the first Napoleon, and that he, as a ruler, was destined to bring France once again to the top of Europe. (Cavendish, 1998, para. 5). His strategy successfully swept him into the office of President of Frances Second Republic. The master Politicians in France couldnt believe that Louis Napoleon had won, and they were even more shocked when he did away with them.But t his didnt satisfy the ambitious ruler and he quickly took advantage of an economic slump in 1851 and shed light on up himself to be the man that the French needed, not as president but as emperor. (Cavendish, 1998, final paragraph). Louis Napoleon Bonaparte can now be called Napoleon III, for in 1852 he declared himself the perfect buy the farm for the job to contain France from collapse and socialism, the Emperor of the second French Empire. (Cavendish, 1998, final paragraph).The citizens of France, so scared of anarchy, and stock-still believing in the Napoleonic Ideals that Napoleon I had left behind, overwhelmingly accepted Louis Napoleon as their sensitive Emperor. The new parliamentary constitution that Napoleon III dress out up gave him the executive powers it allowed him to stomach the members of the law-making council of state and the senate. (France History-Second French Empire n. d. , para. 1). Now that Louis-Napoleon had full control of France, he could freely im plement actions and reforms that he couldnt have easily achieved as President.One of Napoleons keen interests was in architecture, and it was his desire to make Paris a new modern city that in the end turned Paris from an overcrowding, ancient, disease-ridden cluster of districts into the thrive beauty it is today. (Kirkman, 2007, para. 2). Napoleons interest was the foundation that would produce the plans for a rebuilding of Pariss streets, its sewers, and all other aspects of urban planning. It would change the sight of Paris to something unlike anyone had seen. (Kirkman, 2007, para. 2).For hundreds of years, certain areas hadnt been improved, and the frighten away task of a renewal of Paris was laid on Baron Haussmann. Haussmann was a big clock time planner and was an advocate for beautiful sights, perfect balance and exactness. (Paris pg. 18). Haussmanns desire of linear counterbalance surfaced in his first step, which was to put Paris on a grid. He added streets to Paris t hat ran east and west, and northwesterly and south. These new streets were also wider, allowing for more public safety and safer traffic engineering. (Kirkman, 2007, para. 4).The rapid population growth confused with fierce industrialization made some changes to Paris an absolute necessity. An example of this was shown in the growing posit for water closets, which directly led to the need to funnel the human waste effectively into the sewers. (Kirkman, 2007, para. 6). The old ship canal of dumping the waste in the rivers was rejected, and it was now an objective to keep the clean and dirty water separate. This new practice allowed for cleaner water, cleaner streets, cleaner people, and a much-improved healthy environment. (Kirkman, 2007, para. , and final paragraph). Under Napoleons constant input and watch Haussmann unified Paris with visual themes and facades that generated all around in the city. The crosswise style of Haussmann can be seen throughout Paris. (Kirkman, 2007, p ara. 7). Perhaps the just about unifying aspect that Paris stock during its makeover was the improvement of the transportation systems. The railroads underwent massive modernization as train stations were constructed in strategic locations to consociate Paris with the rest of France and to the rest of Europe. (Kirkman, 2007, para. 10).These new train stations benefitted agriculture, industrial growth, international markets, employment opportunities, and they delineated the overall feeling of a more modern city and nation that could be envied from surrounding countries. (Kirkman, 2007, para. 10). Napoleon III exemplified the prosperity and excellence of the time period by this complete rebuilding of Paris. With the help of shocking scale designer Baron Haussmann, Paris slashed boulevards through tangles of slums, began the modern sewer and water systems and set the standard high for the beautiful city that still thrives today. Paris pg. 18) Napoleon III didnt just focus on the im provement and his influence inside of France. Napoleon III headed a strong French foreign policy that occurred in the Second Empire. Particularly important was Napoleon IIIs indispensible utilization in the Italian unification process. Count Camillo di Cavour was the prime minister of the Kingdom of Sardinia, most commonly cognise as Piedmont, and it was his revolutionary ideals and actions that pushed Italian unification forward. But Cavour needed the help of a strong protagonist in order to achieve is goals this ally came in the form of Napoleon III and France. Oracle ThinkQuest, n. d. , sub section III para. 2). Napoleon III always had a specific future planned out for Italy, he even once pushing for his cousin to rule there. (Geddes, 2010, para. 2). Napoleon III attempted to influence these travel movements of unification in Italy following the Revolutions of 1848. Whatever Napoleons intentions were for Italy, whether it was to use Italy as an asset to allot France in the future or if it was to genuinley support the Italian unification, Napoleon saw himself as one that was cause to be the leader of these free peoples of Europe. (Geddes, 2010, para. ). Without the help of the Frech army and the support of Napoleon III, Piedmont would have had no gamble to unify Italy. Napoleon IIIs influence in this unification process was so great he alone put all of Italy together, and kept Rome out of it so as to keep the support of the Catholic church. (Geddes, 2010, final paragraph). There is also an argument that Napoleon I, Napoleon Bonaparte, had the more significant reforms in French history as opposed to Napoleon III. Napoleon I led the French, the the most powerful army in Europe, across the continent in conquerring much of Europe. History, n. d. , opening paragraph). Napoleons reforms included the new Napoleonic Law Code that he implemented in France and in the countries he conquerred, a stronger army, a renewed relationship with the pope, banking and education improvements, and support for the arts and sciences. (History, n. d. The Coup of 18 Brumaire section para. 3). But Napoleon Is reforms were self destructed when Napoleon made several key mistakes that ultimately doomed his reforms and his plan to establish stability back into the post-revolutionized France. History, n. d. The Coup of 18 Brumaire section para. 3). One cutting included the flop of the continental system, or Napoleon Bonapartes attempt the ruin the British economy but in backlash it only ruined the French economy. Another mistake was the blasting invasion of Russia. The Russian army destroyed French supply lines and Napoleon abandoned his army in the Russian winter where they attempted to retreat. Only 100,000 of the original 600,000 French survived. (History, n. d. Napoleons Downfall section para. 1). The French momentum was killed, and so was Napoleon Is popularity. Napoleon I was then agonistic to abdicate the throne by the combined powers of Britain, P russia, Russia, and Austria and he was exiled to Elba. Those same powers, in order to ensure that France wouldnt try to do the same thing again all but eliminated what Napoleon I had long been working for and France was sent back to square one. (History, n. d. Napoleons Downfall section para. 2,3).Therfore, although both Napoleon Bonaparte and Louis Napoleon implemented great reforms in France, Napoleon III had the more significant reforms. Napoleon IIIs reforms had more of a long-lasting effect on France and Europe. Some of these long lasting reforms included the modernization and rebuilding of Paris, improving the French railroads, and influencing the unification of Italy. Thus it is Louis Napoleon Bonaparte that deserves the belief for achieving the more significant reforms in France.