‘Thinking of the Roman Empire’ was recently trending on TikTok. That begged the question: should we all think about the Romans more often? Or does someone like Napoleon deserve more attention because he was more influential? We asked two experts.
“No one will say that Napoleon was unimportant,” professor Egbert Koops (Legal History) told NU.nl. Yet he himself often thinks about the Romans. According to him, even if you think of Napoleon “in a roundabout way” you end up back at Rome. “I don’t think you can get around that.”
“I think the trend on TikTok is so popular because it is an illustration of how the Roman past still has an impact on the present.” You even notice this in areas where the Romans have never been. Such as Chile, China and Turkey, says Koops. One of the subjects he teaches is Roman Law. Precisely because of the influence it still has. “Our whole way of thinking about property is Roman.”
Koops sees this influence not only in law. The rise of universities is also linked to it, because that is where they started the study of, yes, Roman law. He also points out the architecture; think of the columns at bank buildings and chic houses (even though the Greeks used them before the Romans).
According to Koops, the special thing about the story of the Romans in Western Europe is “that after the fall of the Roman Empire, there was never a comparable empire of the same duration and size.”
Ancient Rome already had traffic rules
According to Koops, the Roman Empire also resembled today’s world in a certain way. For example, the Romans introduced taxes, there was a clear central government and there were traffic rules in the ‘world city’ Rome.
The Roman Empire was a republic for many years before it became an empire. But the Romans were also militarists and slave owners.
And we can no longer recognize ourselves in the totalitarian regime of certain emperors. Although… “You still see that imperial way of thinking in Europe, think of Russia.”
Why it makes more sense to think of Napoleon
Historian Bart Verheijen, on the other hand, prefers to think of Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821). That makes sense, because he wrote a whole book about him. But according to him, it is much more logical to think more about Napoleon these days than about the Roman Empire.
“The Romans are not only many times further away from us than Napoleon in terms of time – eighteen hundred years – but also in terms of views on state, culture and politics,” Verheijen emphasizes.
For example, the Romans had taxes, but Napoleon created the modern system we have today. He also separated the power of the church and the government.
In a way, Napoleon ensured that the Netherlands is now the Netherlands, because before him almost every province had a lot of power of its own and there was no unitary state. Then the idea of one country emerged. “He is actually the one who shaped modern Netherlands.”
Citizens gained more power under Napoleon
Since Napoleon we have been a constitutional monarchy. His brother Louis Napoleon became the first king of our country.
And thanks to Napoleon, the royal family must adhere to the Constitution. Citizens gained more power. “From now on they had to take into account what is called ‘the power of the people’.”
Napoleon also modernized the law. Koops also admits that certain types of law are now very different. “For example, we don’t crucify people anymore. And that’s a good thing.”
At the same time, Napoleon was not averse to the death penalty. The big difference with previous years is that Napoleon made everyone equal. Rich or poor: everyone had to pay taxes and everyone with the death penalty was ‘allowed’ to be guillotined.
Napoleon also thought about the Romans
“Napoleon was of course partly thinking about the Romans,” Verheijen admits. Thus he crowned himself emperor, which is a Roman title. In addition, there are the symbols he used, such as the eagle and the laurel wreath. Yet, according to Verheijen, there are very important differences.
“Napoleon was of course not born an emperor.” He also tried to legitimize his title of emperor by asking the people for permission. The Roman emperors would never have done that in the same way.
Napoleon asked the people through a kind of referendum (a plebiscite) whether he could change his job title from consul to emperor. Almost everyone was in favour, but the question is whether they dared to be honest. The vote was public. In addition, the results were “heavily falsified”.
Who were the Romans themselves thinking of?
So it is clear that the Romans made an impression. Yet they themselves looked up to another people. “The Romans themselves thought the Greeks were more impressive.” They drew a lot of inspiration from Greek literature and poetry. Why don’t we think more about the ancient Greeks now?
According to Koops, this is because the Greeks were not united. They had no central government or law and the city-states fought with each other. This ultimately made their influence on the rest of Europe a lot smaller.
“The Romans had a unique talent for law and government,” Koops emphasizes. “Once that empire fell, a new empire never really took its place.”
In his view, the only thing that comes close in terms of duration and size is the European Union. But not everyone will agree with that…
2023-10-05 07:37:25
#Napoleon #Romans #Science
