Warning! This text contains historical datas. To be avoided by readers who can develop history -provoked boredom or other adverse reactions:)

   The thought arose from a random street conversation about one of the most influential and popular architects of western world and about his image that sells so well as a touristic attraction today. People are obviously attracted by famous names that managed to get through time, getting more and more credit as time passes by. People are attracted by geniuses. Exceptional people with undebatable inborn talent that realized daring projects that impacted his generation and the generations to come. They are looked at with inestimable admiration as isolated cases that occur once in a while. They take the “shape” of natural miracles, of scientific, political, artistic or historical superheroes. But..

   ...what really make geniuses geniuses? Is it all about the sparkling ingenuity of one in a million that made them outstanding figures among others? Do they possess qualities that surpass that of all other people of their times or of times before them? Would these geniuses have had exceeded in any given field or taking them from one historical context and throwing them in randomly another context? Has their influence been the result of their own power of will and talent or also the outcome of unknown faces that stood behind them?

   I could have taken the example of Gaudi, as he is one of the most proeminent figures of western art and architecture and the number one attraction for the touristic expeditions in Spain’s artistic capital. It is the name that brings inestimable amounts of money in the Spanish government pockets with the minimum effort of ordinary touristic marketing campaigns. An ambitious artist who made a step forward for the progress of modern architecture and who was controversial for his nonconventional projects. 
    I could have taken the example of a number of other names and reflected on their path to geniality in any given field, which of course would have made it more difficult to debate. But, in part inspired by my recent readings and my interest in history, I decided to stick to the image of one of the history’s most spoiled figures that impressed through strategic and conquering skills. Probably the most symbolic figure of the French history and an international icon, the founder of an extensive empire. Napoleon Bonaparte. I choose this character, as his story is a good example of how other factors among natural personal traits are combating the myth of geniuses. This does not mean I am underestimating the distinct attributes of character that must accompany the success of one man, but I believe the contextual factors are at least as significant  as those. 

   So how did Napoleon become a world conquerer? To understand this we should take a brief look at the overall French life pulse of that time. A France rippled by failed political efforts of transformation and by years of revolutionary attempts. A country experiencing new forms of governing, from an absolute monarchy towards a constitutional model, after years of a general financial crisis that was suffocating the country. The failure of the king and his advisors to bring a remedy to the prolonged crisis, provoked mainly by the resistance of the aristocracy to adopt taxation changes that affected them, resulted ultimately in the coordination of revolutionary actions. 

   France was for years in a desperate situation, broken financially. The king of that time was burdened with the seemingly unsolvable situation that determined him adopt a last saving measure: the Estates-General - an old and long no used national assembly. It consisted of representatives of all layers of society: clergy (at the top), nobility (second) and commoners (bourgeoisie along with workers and peasantry - at last). There were complaints and ambitious aspirations of all levels of society and the assembly proved to be more a confrontation of agendas than a solution to the crisis. The confrontation between the ideals of commoners and the interests of the privileged came to no compromise. As a consequence, the commoners estate known as the Third Estate grouped and named themselves as the National Assembly, suggesting the real representation of the French nation. The reaction was the obstruction of their further participation at the general meetings, fact that stired up even more their revolutionary spirit and motivated the creation of a constitution by their own and a storm of revolts both urban and rural. A new idea of equality, liberty and right of participation into politics has aroused. A citizen militia has been created, the National Guard. Aggressive revolts intimidated the King, who ceased and aproved the idea of a new constitutional monarchy. A new constitution is born, marking the triumph of principles of the Revolution.

   The First Revolution had achieved progress especially in creating a new idea of liberty, equality and fraternity as political principles. It also managed to abolish titles of nobility and privileges of aristocracy, to extend civil rights to discriminated population segments as protestants and jews had been, to renew constitutional prerogatives and to abolish slavery in French colonies. 

   Nevertheless, the new power failed to redress the economic situation, with tactics of confiscating Church’s properties and issuing treasury bonds till it led to the depreciation of French currency and a great inflation. New counterrevolutionary groups were formed and common people increased their expression of despair through acts of rebellion. This discontentment among urban workers gave rise to the Second Revolution, the revolution of the “sans culottes” and the promotion of democratic liberties. In parallel, a series of violent and drastic measures were taken in the name of people’s will under the later named Reign of Terror, whose head was Maximilian Robespierre - head of the Great Comity of Public Safety. He appeared as a saviour with a pragmatic plan of economic regulation and massive military mobilization which had success at a certain extent, keeping France safe from external occupation and internal collapse. But his extreme measures, which included the guillotinated executions of all those who were opponents of his ideas, that accompanied his pretense to democracy led to a general repulsion against democracy and the “sans culotte” movement. Finally, the Reign of Terror collapsed with the arresting and guillotination of his leader.

   After the episodes of revolution ended, a more equilibrated form of government was established (under the name of Directory). The revolutionary idealism was replaced by caution and calm. There were no outstanding figures and pretended heroes, and people were eager to encourage stability and peace. France was becoming popular for war participation, but people were weary of dedicating to the war cause after already so many years of crisis. France needed a new inspirational figure who would answer to their needs of stability, justice and peace. It was just a matter of time for a new leader to arise and get control. And this man proved to be Napoleon.

   Who was Napoleon and what was he doing during the occurance of all these events? Four years before seizing power, he was still an unknown, modest young military officer, oftenly mocked for his short stature, foreign accent and uncertain background. But with ambitiousness, he followed the Military Academy of Paris and was given the role of the second lieutenant of artillery. 
   The context of Revolution set the perfect stage for military ambitious candidates to power. As an outcome of the Revolutions, new posts were made available with the abdication of aristocratic generals. Napoleon got involved in the crushing of a civil riot against the newly created government the Directory, in Paris. Then he gained publicity and acclamation during the Egyptian campaign that was designed to empower France by blocking British trade routes and Russia’s interests in the region. This campaign in Egypt and Syria were so highly publicized, giving Napoleon the proportion of a hero at home, even though in reality it was a different story. Then he continued with campaigns in Italy where he extended French rule, victories that prepared his political career.
    His success in foreign war offered credibility among popular opinion. He became the embodiment of revolutionary ideas and energy. This image assured the success of his conspiracy actions of eliminating the Directory and naming himself First Consul. He  understood the primal needs of the nation and took some key actions. Firstly, he promised what the nation most longed for: economic stability and prosperity. He understood the nations sensibility over religious matters and undertook a major pace in satisfying popular opinion and setting the frame for maintaining peace. He reconciliated the relations with christianity, threatened during the Revolution. He restored the Roman Catholic order and recognized catholicism as national religion.
   These key decisions, amplified by all the marketing behind his military campaigns gave Napoleon astronomical proportion in the eyes of the nation. He was clever enough to sense the vulnerability of the nation and to take advantage of it. At his initiative, he proposed to the electorate to further empower him by voting him First consul for life. The answer to this provocation confirmed his great popularity. A great majority voted him, throwing themselves once again into a monarchic type of ruling.

   So, what exactly transformed the existence of an anonymous person into a national savior-icon and military genius? 


  • The general anarchy and the repeated failure of the monarchs before him to stabilize the economy. Each attempt of the previous leaders was a failure. The nation longed for, needed a saviour-like figure who would bring redemption from the apparent no ending crisis. First, there were still hopes in the solutions of the revolution, but they vanished too. There had to be a solution, and people were willing to grab and support any promising embodiment of it.
  • The military context that gave him free access to unleash his potential: foreign war and the recent abdication of aristocratic military figures. There were not many military opponents, and many already retreated. He did not need to have extraordinary military skills, but he had to seize the opportunity and make himself useful in the foreign campaigns and wars led by France. It is exactly what he had done, getting more projects and credit for them along the way.
  • No other powerful competitors or charismatic potential leaders at the time. The need of a nation to look up at a guiding leader. People were terrified by authoritarian recent figures such as Maximilian Robespierre and disappointed by the previous monarchs and aristocracy. When Napoleon arose, the political arena was silent and plain. The governance of the new Directory was calm but offered no evident improvements. Napoleon was not representing the image of aristocracy, but had a distinct image of a military man - seemed to seize power naturally through his military skills and merits, rather than intentionally longing for political status and power.
  • The situation on international arena. The foreign wars gave France the chance to unleash their military forces. France proved step by step her supremacy and conferred the French people the illusion of power. Napoleon let himself loose in the supremacy game and led wars of conquer, gaining new territories and more prestige.
  • A number of no name, countless persons who stood behind him. His councilors, the well equipped armies and army leaders.

   Napoleon must have been a very ambitious man, whose ambition grew on proportional with his success. But he might have remained just a military unknown man such as others of his time if in a different historical context, in an economically and politically stable France, having to compete with other competent and ambitious leaders, having not faced the need of a nation for a saviour figure. He might haven’t had the resources of fighting in the foreign wars with success if other people before him wouldn’t have built up strong and well equipped armies and other people behind him wouldn’t have sustained his efforts. 

   Geniality is there where talent meets circumstances. For a plastic artist this could mean the matching of his non-conformist (for his time) views with the expectations of an evolving and modernizing society, thirsty for new. For an scientific engineer, an era of transformation and technical progress which also means the allocation of resources for the sake of industrial development. For a medical researcher, the occurrence of catastrophic epidemics and the general efforts of preventing similar events. For historical heros, the temporary national and international political and economic situation. 
Geniality means people behind. It involves people believing in one man’s ideas and standing for them. It means persons with financial power investing in others projects. It means people working hard to apply the daring ideas of someone else.

    Ingeniosity without support rarely becomes genius.