Pearsall's Books

God, I love the internet. It's so easy to wander around and find all kinds of bizarre information and strange theories. On Thursday night, as I was writing the previous post on the Respect and BNP parties, I had a look at Wikipedia's list of UK Political Parties, and one of the parties I had a look at was something called the Islamic Party of Britain, a microscopic Sharia-based political party. So, I had a look at their website, and, while looking at the profile of the party founder/leader, the convert David Musa Pidcock, I noticed that it mentioned that, "He has also organised the translation from the French into English of Napoleon et l'Islam by Christian Cherfils, published in 1914, which chronicles Napoleon Bonaparte's conversion to Islam in 1798, leading to the Code Napoleon, the French civil law adaptation of Islamic law."

This, quite obviously, was new to me. I had never heard anyone suggest that Napoleon had been a convert to Islam or that the Napoleonic Code was an adaptation of the Sharia. So, I decided to investigate. Several different Google searches turned up not much more than quotes from Pidcock and unrelated stuff. One thing that I found, though, that was quite interesting, was a translation of a passage from an 1889 biography of Napoleon by Louis Antoine Fauvelet de Bourrienne, which said:

It has been alleged that Bonaparte, when in Egypt, took part in the religious ceremonies and worship of the Mussulmans; but it cannot be said that he celebrated the festivals of the overflowing of the Nile and the anniversary of the Prophet. The Turks invited him to these merely as a spectator; and the presence of their new master was gratifying to the people. But he never committed the folly of ordering any solemnity. He neither learned nor repeated any prayer of the Koran, as many persons have asserted; neither did he advocate fatalism polygamy, or any other doctrine of the Koran. Bonaparte employed himself better than in discussing with the Imans the theology of the children of Ismael. The ceremonies, at which policy induced him to be present, were to him, and to all who accompanied him, mere matters of curiosity. He never set foot in a mosque; and only on one occasion, which I shall hereafter mention, dressed himself in the Mahometan costume. He attended the festivals to which the green turbans invited him. His religious tolerance was the natural consequence of his philosophic spirit.

Doubtless Bonaparte did, as he was bound to do, show respect for the religion of the country; and he found it necessary to act more like a Mussulman than a Catholic. A wise conqueror supports his triumphs by protecting and even elevating the religion of the conquered people. Bonaparte's principle was, as he himself has often told me, to look upon religions as the work of men, but to respect them everywhere as a powerful engine of government. However, I will not go so far as to say that he would not have changed his religion had the conquest of the East been the price of that change. All that he said about Mahomet, Islamism, and the Koran to the great men of the country he laughed at himself. He enjoyed the gratification of having all his fine sayings on the subject of religion translated into Arabic poetry, and repeated from mouth to mouth. This of course tended to conciliate the people.

I confess that Bonaparte frequently conversed with the chiefs of the Mussulman religion on the subject of his conversion; but only for the sake of amusement. The priests of the Koran, who would probably have been delighted to convert us, offered us the most ample concessions. But these conversations were merely started by way of entertainment, and never could have warranted a supposition of their leading to any serious result. If Bonaparte spoke as a Mussulman, it was merely in his character of a military and political chief in a Mussulman country. To do so was essential to his success, to the safety of his army, and, consequently, to his glory. In every country he would have drawn up proclamations and delivered addresses on the same principle. In India he would have been for Ali, at Thibet for the Dalai-lama, and in China for Confucius.

This seems more plausible to me than that Napoleon actually converted to Islam, a claim that has the ring of wishful thinking. Yet, it is not something I am altogether sure about, and I can't seem to find many good sources on Google. Do any of you know any more on the subject?