The social structure: The French society was divided into three Estates. The First Estate included the clergy who enjoyed lavish lifestyles. The Second Estate consisted of the nobility, another privileged group which held the highest positions in the government, the Church and the army. The Third Estate consisting of peasants and the bourgeoisie felt aggrieved and resented the aristocracy which members were hell-bent on making sure everyone maintained their social statuses.
Finances: Due to the major losses incurred during the wars which France had been involved in prior to the French Revolution, the country experienced a financial crisis. Despite going through such a situation, the peasants still continued to be heavily taxed while the earnings of the aristocracy did not change. This made the majority of peasants add more to their resentment of members of the higher social class.
The trajectory of the French Revolution
By 1614, the majority of non-aristocrats limited voting power since voting rights favored those of the higher class. The members of the Third Estate thus raise a revolution in Versailles. In April 1792, the newly elected Legislative Assembly declared war on neighboring Austria and Russia.
One of the extremists, the Jacobins, went ahead and ordered the execution of King Louise XVI (Chapman 2). On November 9, 1979, Napoleon Bonaparte staged a coup d’état against the current regime. This marked the end of the French Revolution and the beginning of the Napoleonic era.
Napoleon played a vital role in quelling the French Revolution. He was responsible for ending the Jacobins regime of terror. However, his era was marked by increased warfare across Europe as he attempted to dominate much of the continent.
The Congress of Vienna
The Congress of Vienna was formed as a military coalition of the countries which were against Napoleon’s rule (Chapman 1). These were Britain, Austria, Prussia and Russia (Merriman 569). Their main objective was to oust Napoleon from power and restore peace in Europe. After these nations had succeeded in ousting Napoleon as the ruler of France, the country joined the Congress, and the four nations later formed the Concert of Europe.
The Concert was mostly successful in promoting an ideology of conservatism in Europe. However, the group faced challenges in its quest to promote conservatism. Such revolts as the Decembrist Revolt of 1825 posed a major threat. However, the Concert did not succeed in performing its mission when the revolt led by more than 3,000 of Russian soldiers was suppressed by the Russian ruler Nicholas I.
The French Revolution of 1830
In some cases, however, the Congress seemed to fail in its mandate of maintaining the ideology of conservatism in Europe. By signing the Congress of Vienna’s “Final Act”, the four countries had agreed to end warfare in the continent. However, the French Revolution of 1830 defied this agreement. Also known as the July Revolution, this revolt saw the Duke of Orleans, Louise-Philippe, turn against the current regime of King Charles X (Merriman 444).
This marked the transition of the monarch proposed by the Concert of Europe members, the Bourbon Restoration, and the start of another regime called the July Monarchy. This was a major blow to the terms set during signing the “Final Act” at the Congress of Vienna since the Bourbon Restoration was formed after the ousting of Napoleon as the ruler of France. The ideology of nationalism and liberalism reared its ugly head again as far as the rest of the Concert of Europe’s members were concerned.
Works Cited
Chapman, Tim. The Congress of Vienna: Origins, Processes and Results. London: Routledge, 1998. Print.
Merriman, John M. A History of Modern Europe: From the Renaissance to the Present. New York: W.W. Norton, 2010. Print.
The French Revolution (1789-1815) came a time when the political systems and structures were in great disfavor of the general population. This essay explores some of the factors that spurred the revolution from different perspectives.
Fiscal irresponsibility
The constant state of financial crisis in France when King Louis XVI was in power was a sour taste in the mouth of many. To make matters worse, the Seven Year’s war that was financed by the Kingdom drained the regime financially leading to a state of desperation among the citizens.
The relationship between the aristocracy and the King grew tense. As a result, publishing of the royal decrees by magistrates deployed at the parlements was constrained by the very magistrates as a way of showing their discontent. The fiscal irresponsibility was aggravated when the King commissioned France to yet another war (Dwyer & McPhee, 2002). Subsequently, rebellion and a spirit of revolution began to ferment among the commoners, the nobility and the clergy as well as the wider French society.
Democracy and brotherhood
Real democracy in France came at a time when elections were permitted for all groups of citizens, drawn from different classes and estates. Indeed, the spirit of brotherhood was visible in the wake of democracy as Estates General announced elections that almost immediately, sparked vicious rounds of political debate and wrangling (Dwyer & McPhee, 2002).
Needless to say, the spirit of brotherhood was heavily demonstrated by the members of the Third Estate who organized various public forums to demand for a wider democratic space than they had been allotted before.
Later, the Estates general gathered a host of grievances in note books as a show of solidarity wit the cry of the people in terms of political dissatisfaction. The universality of unhappiness was vividly demonstrated in this collection, a real display of brotherhood towards a common foe-unpopular regime (Kishlansky, Geary & O’Brien, 2008).
Hubris
The high state of arrogance, self confidence as well as excessive pride among the autocratic rulers played a key role in the French Revolution. It is understood that at one point in time, the noble existence of the National Assembly was arrogantly refuted by King Louis XVI.
As much as the National Assembly was a constitutionally structured organ, he did disregard in totality and instead started marshaling troops in order to forcibly fix his will against the people. This did not go down well with the French public. They took to arms and stormed the royal armory (Dwyer & McPhee, 2002). The National Assembly was thereafter supported by the citizen militia that was formed to counter the King’s unilateral decision.
Liberty and equality
The Declaration of equal rights of men and women by the French National Assembly in 1789 was indeed a wake up call for the French citizenry to not only be aware of the basic human rights and equity, but also fight for it passionately.
Although the constitution that was enacted three years later lacked much of the ideals of democracy, it provided a broad platform through reformers and other French citizens could air their opinions as well as champion for their rights. In fact, the new constitutional dispensation gave some room to pin-hole liberty in France amid co0nstraints in some clauses.
Unfortunately, the fact that the very constitution acted a springboard for good governance in future did not imply that it would not encounter resistance. For example, voting rights were only reserved to those who owned property or were wealthy.
Besides, the political elite were those who controlled wealth (Kishlansky, Geary & O’Brien, 2008). Such disparity between the have and the have-nots sparked anger and discontent on the basis of lack of equality and liberty to all and sundry. The end result of such an undmo0cratic system was definitely incessant rebellion.
Technology
Massive human suffering and subsequent loss of life during the historical French revolution was mainly aggravated by the state of technology at that time. For instance, the invention of guillotine machine led to mass killing whereby those who participated in the revolution were captured and victimized by chopping off the head.
On one end, it was used as a vital tool for suppressing the revolution (Dwyer & McPhee, 2002). On the other hand, the use of the device in committing mass murders heightened the anger of reformers and consequently acted as an impetus in worsening the revolution through counter attacks to the unpopular regime.
References
Dwyer, G. P. & McPhee, P. (2002). The French Revolution and Napoleon: a sourcebook, New York: Routledge.
Kishlansky, M., Geary, P. & O’Brien, P. (2008). Civilization in the West (7th ed.), New York: Longman Pearson Education, Inc.
The period of the French revolution was celebrated with a lot of enthusiasm and it can be perceived to have laid the groundwork and the birth of the new world socio-political order. This is an arrangement that is still analyzed by historians and social scientists alike as unique and diverse, and at the same time controversial to the avenues and trend, which had been in France before that time[1].
The French Revolution has indeed been seen as very complex, because its repercussions had spilt over effects to Europe and even the world over. Writers and political analysts wrote tremendously about the French Revolution both in 20th and 19th Century with the likes of Emile Dukheim launching their study of sociology based on the political and industrial turmoil the French Society underwent during that point in time[2].
Indeed, this point is emphasized by Nelly when she argues that, whereas the causes that characterized the French revolution cannot be authoritatively established, scholars and thinkers alike do recognize that the underlying impacts of that event spilled over into other parts of the world other than in France itself[3].
Notably, before the revolution, France was considered as a backward nation. This is because the notion was that it had not a so well balanced situation since the economic and intellectual development was not congruent to the social change[4].
This is perhaps the reason why studying the likes of Lazare Carnot who played a key role in the Revolution remains very core; since, based on his tactics and organizational competence, many governments and nations wanted to mimic his strategies especially based on his military successes that were interwoven in economic relating to technological advancement as well as cultural factors[5].
Indeed, the French society was undergoing a lot of industrial and political turmoil, to the extent that the intermediaries especially those against the aristocracy of the day began to push for change; this is how complex the revolution was[6]. Lazare Carnot, who was a staunch republican, is regarded as one of the men who voted for the execution Louis XVI[7].
Scholars of history have since posited that his desire was to see France emerge from turmoil to insurmountable success and France to be strong enough to defend itself, together with its ideals against the nations whose intentions were to destroy it[8].
Summary of Carnot’s Life and Role in the Revolution
In summary, Carnot role and the impact of the revolution can be broadly looked at in a number of ways. One is in his execution of Louise XVI and his motive to realize a French society, which was strong to battle it out with other nations in terms of ideals, economic stability, as well as cultural independence[9].
Second is to examine him in the context of how he restructured the French Army mass conscription and bringing together of different regiments together with volunteers, and new recruits blended with war veterans or those who were already considered experienced enough.
Historians have since asserted for instance that this arrangement brought in the much-needed impetus, enhanced manpower, and facilitated speedy gaining of experience by the new recruits who later became instrumental in the war[10]. Third is the fact that Carnot exhibited his war aptitudes in the field and in essence practically aiding the wining of various battles[11].
Fourth is to view him in the part when he was a member of various committees. For instance, while he was a member of public safety committee, he got involved in the fight with Maximillein Robespierre, and later surviving the fall of his regime and cronies alike[12].
The fifth way is to examine when he was at his highest position as the President of the Directory. During this time, he was strongly opposed to ‘imperial honors’, causing him to have a friction, leading to eventual fall out with Napoleon Bonaparte. Later, he took over the Defence of Anterwep. The sixth way would be to examine the retuning emperor campaign for 100 days. Finally, there is need to scrutinize his life in exile, which he later spent in many European cities during which he wrote memoirs[13].
Carnot’s Educational Biography and Career: Summery Reflection
Lazare Carnot graduated from the School of Engineering in Mezieres in 1773.
He wrote a book titled Essai sur les Machine en general in 1778, which was based on engineering and mechanics; indeed, he submitted it for a prize competition. Interestingly, he failed to honor “an invitation to enter the Prussian service and in the same year period, he was elevated to the level of captain”[14].
It was in 1787 that Lazare Carnot got into the Dijon Academy, effectively becoming a member of the academy. Later on, he served in Legislative Assembly, the National Convention, and “director of the Army of the North after April 1793” before becoming the “leading member of the Committee of General Defense and a member of the Committee of Public Safety”[15].
The year 1797 is considered a very eventful year for Carnot, as it was the year when he published his book, which became famous. Although however everything indicates that there will be a “new turn in the culture of mathematics, the author deems it opposite to publish this monograph”[16].
It was in 1780 that Lazare Carnot came back to France following the installation of Napoleon Bonaparte as the First Consul; and surprisingly enough “he became Napoleon Bonaparte’s minister of war for a period of five months and he was promoted further to rank of lieutenant general” [17]; however, Carnot is best known as geometer.
Lazare Carnot survived and maintained his position of power through the time of the French Revolution. This was from the time of the inception of the war to its ending during the bringing down of the greatest Charlatan of his time, Napoleon Bonaparte. This period was between 1789 and 1815[18].
Socio-politically, Lazare Carnot is regarded to have started a number of instrumental reforms ideal for France at that time and arguably for the generation that were to follow. These included his proposition on mandatory public Education for all the French Nationals[19]. He was also involved in writing of the French Constitution together with others such as Thomas Paine, the writer of common sense.
The constitution among others entailed provisions of the declaration of the duties of the citizens. This declaration entailed among others, that all citizens of France are entitled to both education and military service training and that this should encompass those that are within the age ranges of 21 to 25[20].
Regardless of the fact that Carnot was of noble birth, he championed for a system where recognition of citizens was to be based on intelligence and their abilities and not merely based on birth; this was revolutionary. It is argued that it was on this school of thought that Napoleon Bonaparte rose to power in France, since also Carnot elevated him to be a general from captainship[21].
Houghton Mifflin Company notes that one f the greatest success stories in favor of Carnot by denouncing French government were of military nature. Indeed, was it not for Carnot, “the modern waging of war with mass armies and strategic planning would not exist”[22].
Being a military engineer that he was, he developed policies in favor of fortresses and strategies, which were largely defensive by nature. It was only as a result of the regular invasions that he changed tact and opted for attacking as his strategic Planning method. The strategies that he developed were within and largely informed by his intelligence and military genius.
Therefore, he managed to coordinate maneuvers and put in an organizational competence, leading to major turning of the wave of war right from 1703 to 1794. By him incepting this idea, the background was grounded on the fact that he was shrewd in making his army divided and deployed in a number of units[23].
This would ensure that they speedily move and attack from all angles in the end, and not have a head-on collision with the adversary. He had thought earlier that attacking the enemy directly would lead to same defeats as it has happened before when he had not been elected to the Community of Public Safety. Indeed, the tactics he employed were victorious in many fronts and were largely superior to the traditional methods that had been applied previously by a number of European Armies[24].
Perhaps, Carnot strength was to be found in his leverage of training the conscripts in the art of war and to deploy the new recruits together with soldiers who had enormous experience and this ensured sharing of ideas on how to wage war against an enemy. Beyond this, he discovered a political strategy, which had advantages.
This was to disconnect and disrupt an adversary communication links between enemy countries of England and Austria. While at that, he kept on attacking England. Noteworthy is the fact that his military styles were finally employed in initiating and eventual overturn of Robespierre. Considering various viewpoints of Carnot, he should be understood in a number of dimensions[25].
The Biography and his role and Impact in Details
Creation of the Republican Concept
Noteworthy, Carnot’s role in bringing about political change is characterized by the economy. Even though France was not a balanced country in terms of having a clearly distinguishable political economy, the idea only came to being by Carnot’s merging the ideas of Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716) and Jean-Baptiste Colbert (1619-1683)[26].
Paoli notes that Leibniz economics was based on technological advancement being formal training that would usher in success in all countries. For him, this called for reorganization of the society, facilitate success and to bring about Cultural Revolution. His view was tailored around what he called ‘social reproduction’ and not on simple accounting. Of course, Carnots and his co-contemporaries used this knowledge to their advantage[27].
For Colbert, his ideas were also resounding for Carnot, being the first ‘statesman’ to develop the idea of planned economy, and established the French Academy of sciences, putting in Research and Development Department, he was certainly influential to Carnot. Further, he liked all the departments to Technological Development.
Carnot combined these ideas: strong political economy and cultural independence to understand how to destroy enemy states at that time, the British with the aim of creating insurmountable unsolvable crisis.
Carnot and his Leibnizinism
Lazare Carnot was trained by the American, Benjamin Franklin, who had fought so hard against Feudalism in America and Europe. Here, it is noteworthy to mention that he went to a school operated by Oratorian Fathers and studied the works established by Leibniz and later went to Méziers where he learnt military engineering. It was between 1783 and 1784 that “Lazare Carnot came into contact with Franklin’s Parisian circles, and began the fundamental political endeavor”[28].
Paoli notes that “Carnot defined himself as Leibnizian in a broadest sense” when he wrote his essay “Essay on Machines” in which he profoundly asserts that the progress of society is just a good as its technological advancement[29].
It was also during this time that Carnot assisted some of his friends and the ‘Montogolfier’ brothers in an experiment of aerostatic balloons, something that had tremendous appeal against those that believed that man could not influence nature especially going against gravity as a law. He was to later bring in a notion, which fundamentally challenged the principles of thermodynamics and energy conversion. Beyond that, he refuted the claim on “ecology movement for solar energy for new ‘diffuse’ sources of energy”[30].
The struggle for a republic during the Revolution
Carnot, Franklin and their followers played a big role as far as the revolution is concerned. The role of Carnot in the making of the first republican army, which had the potential of dealing effectively with other countries’ forces that were liaising with French royal class and considered a lot capable and superior. Paoli notes that the revolution had two broad motives in fighting for power right from its inception.
One was the American influence, which entailed the likes of Thomas Paine, and this did not focus on the creation formation of regime change, rather it was wired to encompass implementation of an economic as well social policy changes modeled the same way the American one was[31]. Carnot thus came in to protect the real spirit of the revolution among the French masses. He was against the faction which wanted to ensure Orleans were on the throne, which having not achieved its goal was split down the middle into two[32].
Carnot, because of his membership to the committee in charge citizen’s safety, had to belong to Robespierre function, but as he profoundly asserts, he was opposed to it for its ‘cruelty and tyranny.’ It was after a number of intimidative plans by the authorities that Carnot and those that believed in his thought (his student friends at the Meseires School of engineering) were elected to the Legislative Assembly[33].
Thus, it was also the time that they attempted to craft a political movement that defined the politics of France for the years that would follow. The dilemma then became that a line was drawn between republicans. These were operating separately either in fight or defense of the feudal lord ideology which considered man to be a ‘laborer and just a beast’[34].
Carnot and the Education of the Citizenry
The role of Carnot here became very important in the sense that he was elected to the new Legislative Assembly and to the committee responsible for public/civic education. Here, he was largely responsible for the reconstruction of the French Education and pedagogical arrangement.
Even though the likes of Danton, Marat and like minded were opposed to Carnot’s ideas including supporting a statement that ’the republic has no use for scientists’ as stated some judges then. Carnot still pushed on; it was in fact such remarks as those of judges that provoked the ‘permanent revolution’[35].
Carnot Organizer of victory
It was in 1792 that Carnot and his friends organized to cease power with the motive of stooping the ‘destruction of France’. He employed a military model that borrowed from the republican political loom to the skill of war. It entailed combination and application of various disciplines that he had experience in including `science, technology, and a victorious military strategy’[36].
Scholars and historians particularly have since argued that his tactic were incredible because he successfully brought them into play in the middle of anarchy, economic collapse, as well as foreign invasion.
In his earlier writings, Carnot emphasized the concept of the art of war in which he reiterated the relationship among defense works, and the restructuring of the economy and mass employment of modern technology. Beyond this, he brings in the significance of using cultural autonomy as a very good tool in war and societal reconstruction.
Due to the fact that he was a renowned tactician and who viewed war with global lenses, he was flexible and very resonate in his approach to the extent that he sought out some strategies from to iron out `aspects of military deployment’ Guibert even though they clashed in 1784[37].
He at one point took a tour to rearrange the forces and having realized how bad the situation had been, he connected to what he called `the stupidity of the revolutionaries’. He thus planned some actions to be taken to correct the situation. When Carnot ascended to power, he brought in great scientists who he used to reconstruct the military supply and logistics[38].
They were mathematicians, chemists, geometers, and engineers all of which came from Métiers. They eventually, five years later, managed to overturn the military situation. The French army also became great to the extent that it became a model to be copied by many countries the world over. Scholars have argued that it was a time when the great Nicolo Machiavelli was realized[39].
Carnot Thermodian Coup d’ Etat
Robespierre tried going after and trying to execute Carnot. This was during the period between September of 1793 and April 1794 when Carnot had made success stories regarding the military conditions in France.
However, Carnot having been provoked decided to deploy his army with the purpose of eliminating the partisans of Robespierre without killing anyone. It was after this that he gained his total freedom as he deemed fit. While this was an opportunity, which he used to consolidate the fragile bases of the French Republic, he however, did not capitalize on this to eliminate his rivals who interestingly were to get him out of power later in 1797[40].
Hanson reckons that Carnot always thought not in terms of short-lived plans, but by plans whose impacts would be felt in a long time. For instance, in September of the same year, he established the Ecole Polytechnique, a school that created the best of European Scientists and was to be an assailable legacy/model for the world during the 19th Century[41].
In 1984, Carnot made an evolutionary speech, a speech that was largely against Napoleon Bonaparte. In his speech, he explicitly emphasized that Bonaparte should have chosen America and George Washington models rather than choosing Rome and Julius Caesar[42].
Carnot’s view was embedded in the idea that, to create a Europe with lasting peace, it was important to factor in republican regimes or monarchies characterized with republican economic systems. This, according to him, would mean the disbandment of the feudal lords system or the feudal oligarchy, and what he called ‘the worst tyranny that ever existed’ and regardless of the fact that the English tried to interfere with Carnot’s ideas he still pressed on[43].
When Robespierre had fallen, those who expedited soft landing for the English Oligarch tried to oppose Carnot, and in 1795, a group of individuals led by Barras and Talleyrand, had formed a command pedestal for those called ‘Themidorians’[44].
This group later in 1797 tried to eliminate Carnot when the army devoted to him was away. Surprisingly, Barras still went ahead to publicize some information that Carnot was trying to commit treason, information that was false. Due to this misled information, Carnot became frightened and escaped to Switzerland having barely survived death[45].
Regardless of the fact that Carnot’s plan was on peace, his seeking refuge in Switzerland was a great relief to the monarchists, as well as English and French agents. It was however not easy to scrap out the institutions and the ideologies he had built over the years[46].
Napoleonic Period
When Napoleon Bonaparte took power in 1799, he called Carnot back to France and made him his Inspector of War, where he was in charge of army training and deployment besides having the authority to reconstructing the French Army all the way in Germany. Interestingly, Carnot resigned from the position a year later, based on lack of congruency of ideas between the two[47]. Napoleon Bonaparte was very much concerned with the ideology of monarchy, and had inconsistent republican views that Carnot held very dear[48].
Beyond that, he had a less tactical approach to war. It should however not escape his mind that during his short-lived period in office, he still endeavored to map out what he felt as the road that reforms should follow, particularly as far as education matters were concerned. Education in his view should have followed republican approach[49].
Also, Carnot persisted in implementing his reform agenda of enhancing the authority of the army in France, and went ahead to form ‘corps’ of telegraphers and incepted the idea of forming a unique special unit-that of naval infantry, an idea which Bonaparte was vehemently opposed to, and Carnot had quit government.
The following years between 1800 and1804, Lazare Carnot dedicated himself to putting his scientific ideas into writing and it was during this time that he produced his works in geometry and machines. Some of his works soon became the basis for republican views as far as Science was concerned. It was also during this period that he found himself alone ‘opposer’ of Napoleon rules[50].
At this time, he was determined and worked together with other like-minded individuals to form a common thread in scientific reasoning and methodology. This opened a window of opportunity to the formation of Prussia Institutions akin to those that were on France, and University in Berlin was created[51].
It was not until 1814 that those that followed Carnot’s teaching ganged to the extent that the empire under Napoleon collapsed. However, since Carnot saw this as a threat to stability in France he returned to governmental service even though he was already 60 years of age. He was at this initiative appointed Governor in charge of the City Of Garrison of Anvers.
He was to defend, with marked intelligence, the town that it was not subdued by any adversary. Interestingly, the Prussians were so impressed by the way he defended the to the extent that they refused to kill him even when they were ordered to do so by King Louis XVIII[52].
Napoleon appointed him Interior Minister when he returned from exile, and Carnot formed the Council of Industry and Welfare, bringing together the men who belonged to the Committee in Charge of Defense[53]. This program is viewed by historians and political scientists to have ushered in grounding on economic scientific workings that were technology based and this became the lenses through which the countries industrial innovations and capacities were anchored and encouraged.
The French Army was to face defeat later in the same year because of Napoleon stubbornness to heed to Carnot’s advice[54]. Napoleon tended his resignation and Carnot once again took the place of the president of the Assembly of France.
He organized the army, but Fouche ‘committed treason against Carnot’ and stalled his plan to protect that Capital[55]. Louis appointed Carnot to the position of the Interior Minister for his role as a ‘thank you’ for his efforts. Regardless, Fouche soon drew a list of those to be exiled as he was asked to do so by Louis and Carnot was first the in the list[56].
Carnot and his Exile in Magdeburg
Because of his name in the Fouche’s list, Carnot was forced to flee to Magdeburg, a place that accommodated him adequately and he formed a good rapport with the inhabitants. His spirit was soon to be anchored since he found a number of personalities who subscribed to republican scientific orientations[57].
It was not surprising that the “German republicans sought to build in Germany a republic which would be based on the ideas of Franklin and the French”[58]. This made Germany and Prussia to be ahead educationally, and England was towing behind. Among the other exploits during this time was that Franco-German scientists soon established a number of colleges and created a journal called Crelle’s Journal[59].
Death of Carnot
Carnot passed on in 1823 in Magdeburg. At this time, there was decay in France whereas Prussia was making headways. Perhaps that would not have happened had his ideas been fully embraced in France[60].
Conclusion
The French revolution had significant influence in the lives of leaders who lived at the time of its occurrence. France, having been seen as inferior to its rival European countries, was trying to redeem and rediscover itself, more so following the mediocre nature of leadership by the then political leaders, who made the country fall into turmoil both socially and economically.
It is for this reason that some great revolutionists such as Lazare Carnot fought protracted battles to engineer change in the country. Carnot’s political ambitions began early in his life; indeed, during his education life, he had written various books and later joined the army. The French revolution however, had a significant bearing and influence in the life of Lazare Carnot, especially given the fact that during this time he was the minister of war in the government of Napoleon, the then leader of France.
However, the actual effect of the revolution on Lazare Carnot can be assessed by looking at the roles he played during the time of the revolution. In this case, it is good to assess his role in execution of Louise XVI, his role in French Army, the various public committees he served in, the highest position held, and lastly, his actions while in exile.
Nevertheless, his prowess, both in democratic front and in war made various leaders during his life to embrace him and incorporate him in their armies, and surprisingly enough, he never failed them. Indeed, sometimes he became even more powerful and critical to the leadership especially during the rule of Napoleon, thus necessitating his exile to neighboring countries.
Bibliography
Anonymous. Biography of Distinguished Scientific Men. NY: Forgotten Books, N.d.
Arnold James. The Aftermath of the French Revolution. Minneapolis: Twenty First-Century Books, 2009.
Gillipse, Charles. Science and Polity in France: The End of the Old Regime. New Jersey: Pricenton: Pricenton University Press, 2004.
Hanson, Paul. Contesting the French Revolution. NY: Blackwell Publishers, 2008.
Houghton Mifflin Company. The Houghton Dictionary of Biography. NY: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2003.
Kates, Gary. The French Revolution: Recent debates and New Controversies. Second Edition. New York: Routledge, 1998.
Moran, Daniel. The People in Arms: Military myth and national Mobilization since the French Revolution. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Neely, Sylvia. A Concise History of the French Revolution. Maryland. Rowman and Littlefield, Inc, 2008.
Price, Roger. A Concise History of France. Second Edition. New York: Cambridge Press, 2005.
Schubring, Gert. Conflict between Generalization, Rigor and Intuition. Number concepts underlying the development of analysis in 17th-19th century France and Germany. CA: Springer Sciences, 2008.
Struik, Dirk. A Concise History of Mathematics. Fourth Edition. NY: Dover Publications, 1987.
Footnotes
Sylvia Neely. A Concise History of the French Revolution, (Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield, Inc, 2008).
Daniel Moran. The People in Arms: Military myth and national Mobilization since the French Revolution, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003).
Sylvia Neely. A Concise History of the French Revolution, (Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield, Inc, 2008).
Paul Hanson, Contesting the French Revolution, (NY: Blackwell Publishers, 2008).
Sylvia Neely, 2008, ibid.
Paul Hanson, 2008, ibid.
Sylvia Neely, 2008, ibid.
Gary Kates, the French Revolution: Recent debates and New Controversies, Second Edition, (New York: Routledge, 1998).
Daniel Moran, 2003, ibid.
Dino Paoli. “Lazare Carnot’s Grand Strategy for Political Victory.” Executive Intelligent Review, 1996.
Daniel Moran, 2003, ibid.
Daniel Moran, 2003, ibid.
Gary Kates, 1998, ibid.
Houghton Mifflin Company. The Houghton Dictionary of Biography. (NY: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2003).
Houghton Mifflin Company, 2003, ibid.
Daniel Moran, 2003, ibid.
Daniel Moran, 2003, ibid.
Paul Hanson, 2008, ibid.
Paul Hanson, 2008, ibid.
Daniel Moran, 2003, ibid.
Dino Paoli., 1996, ibid.
Houghton Mifflin Company, 2003, ibid.
Charles Gillipse, Science and Polity in France: The End of the Old Regime, (New Jersey: Pricenton: Pricenton University Press, 2004).
Paul Hanson, 2008, ibid.
Houghton Mifflin Company, 2003, ibid.
Charles Gillipse, 2004, ibid.
Dino Paoli., 1996, ibid.
Houghton Mifflin Company, 2003, ibid.
Dino Paoli., 1996, ibid.
Gary Kates, 1998, ibid.
Dino Paoli., 1996, ibid.
Houghton Mifflin Company, 2003, ibid.
Gary Kates, 1998, ibid.
Gary Kates, 1998, ibid.
Houghton Mifflin Company, 2003, ibid.
Dino Paoli., 1996, ibid.
Gary Kates, 1998, ibid.
Houghton Mifflin Company, 2003, ibid.
Dino Paoli., 1996, ibid.
Paul Hanson, 2008, ibid.
Anonymous. Biography of Distinguished Scientific Men. NY: Forgotten Books, N.d.
Charles Gillipse, 2004, ibid.
Dirk Struik, A Concise History of Mathematics, Fourth Edition, (NY: Dover Publications, 1987).
Charles Gillipse, 2004, ibid.
Dino Paoli., 1996, ibid.
Gary Kates, 1998, ibid.
Schubring, Gert. Conflict between Generalization, Rigor and Intuition. Number concepts underlying the development of analysis in 17th-19th century France and Germany, (CA: Springer Sciences, 2008).
Dirk Struik, 1987, ibid.
Charles Gillipse, 2004, ibid.
Paul Hanson, 2008, ibid.
James Arnold, The Aftermath of the French Revolution, (Minneapolis: Twenty First-Century Books, 2009).
Roger Price, A Concise History of France, Second Edition, (New York: Cambridge Press, 2005).
Houghton Mifflin Company, 2003, ibid.
Roger Price, 2005, ibid.
Paul Hanson, 2008, ibid.
Roger Price. A Concise History of France. Second Edition, (New York: Cambridge Press, 2005).
Gary Kates. The French Revolution: Recent debates and New Controversies. Second Edition. (New York. Routledge, 1998).
Dino Paoli. “Lazare Carnot’s Grand Strategy for Political Victory.” Executive Intelligent Review, 1996.
Dino Paoli. “Lazare Carnot’s Grand Strategy for Political Victory.” Executive Intelligent Review, 1996.
Houghton Mifflin Company. The Houghton Dictionary of Biography, (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2003).
The French Revolution (1789-1799) became the period of significant changes within the French society and in the political life of France. It began with the meeting of the Estates-General in May, 1789, and finished with Napoleon Bonaparte’s coming to power in November, 1799 (Duiker and Spielvogel 394).
Like any substantial change in the political life of any country, the French Revolution consisted of several stages of the dramatic transformation of the state system, political and social life in France. In this paper, we will discuss the period from the Thermidorian Reaction to the last years of Napoleon’s government. We will discuss the reasons and the course of change of leadership in France during this period.
The Thermidorian Reaction, 27 July 1794, was the response on the violent policies of Reign of Terror and actually put an end to it. Being inspired by the ideas of the French Revolution, the people of France continued their struggle for their rights and for effective state system. The power in the country was taken by the Executive Directory (1795-1799).
The new body of executive power that consisted of five elected Directors started functioning within the country and at the same time took intense military actions abroad. The inner policies of the Directory were not successful with people and gradually led to the loss of its authority.
Particularly, the inability to implement successful taxation and financial policies, “flourishing” corruption and faction between the directors (ibid.) were step by step undermining the influence of the Directory. The French people expected the opportunity to forget about the events of the last years; however, the governance of the Directory did not meet their expectations, as the country did not approach to the desired stability.
On the other hand, the military successes of France did not contribute to the authority of the Directory, but backwards, actually gave birth to Napoleon’s bright political start. In 1799, the Directory finished its existence. Failures in the inner and foreign policies gave a good opportunity for Napoleon who came to France after the military operations to overthrow the Directory and seize power.
Napoleon’s success at the first stages of his governance can be explained by the effective balance between “liberation” and strengthening of his own power. He understood that the processes emerged during the first years of the Revolution could not disappear: they were more likely to be a starting point for the further changes.
Thus, it is possible to say that since the beginning of Napoleon’s era, the political life in France took its course between two poles, which are Napoleon’s personal motives of keeping and maintaining his power, and the inertial power of the French Revolution (Hunt et al 650-652).
The slogan “Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity” reflects the essence of French Revolution; its focus was defense and equalization of the human rights and transformation of the social and political system in France, which included elimination of monarchy and replacing it with republic. During Napoleon’s governance, these two matters submitted to the interests of Napoleon as a governor. Instead of republic, Napoleon established an empire and defended his power by means of strong military services (652).
Since that moment, the notion of “liberation” stated by the revolutionary slogan had lost its initial meaning and served to Napoleon’s plans as the justification and disguise for his intent of conquest, being realized in his French-style reforms throughout the lands belonging to France.
In 1789, The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen proclaimed “freedom of religion, freedom of press, equality of taxation, and equality before the law” (660). Napoleon slightly followed the statements born by the Revolution, adapting them to the needs of strengthening his power: for example, he reduced an initial number of newspapers in Paris, which was seventy-three, to thirteen and then to four (684). He cultivated and popularized the image representing him as a hero, a magnificent governor.
When forming the new political system of France, Napoleon followed his imperial intents: he focused on eliminating both the ascendancy of the old nobility and the influence of the contemporary revolutionary trends of equality and liberation, and the most appropriate decision was to create the new nobility based on the military estate which would support his power.
Besides the political field, Napoleon reformed the legislation, having introduced the Civil Code: again, on the one hand, it was aimed to provide equality; on the other hand, this concerned only the adult males, omitting the rights of women and children.
The social transformations were fulfilled by Napoleon’s predecessors as well; however, they had another nature: the Revolution had penetrated into the life of the citizens too deeply, touching upon all fields of their life, including even the forms of speech and the names of the months (669).
Certainly, this intrusion was not a single factor which caused the resistance to the Revolution: some people were just tired of the hard conditions of life, such as “long bread lines” (670) or of the terror; however, the combination of a range of factors impacted on the total outcome of the Revolution. Thus, Napoleon came to power when the revolutionary “foam” descended and focused only on the matters which could impact his position and power, which defined the direction of his policy.
During the decade of his government, Napoleon’s power was strengthening within and outside the country. By 1812, the military success of France was impressive: only Great Britain and Russia as two major European countries kept their full independence (692). In fact, the Great Britain was the main obstacle on Napoleon’s way to fulfillment of his plans: the country “ruled the seas” (691), and its economy was developing rapidly; Britain produced goods and exported them to the European markets.
On the other hand, Napoleon’s power was undermined by his military failure in the war against Russia: trying to fight on two fronts simultaneously, having not enough provision and being not ready to the cold climate of the Russian territories, the French army failed. In 1813, the coalition of the Russian, Austrian, Prussian and Swedish armies (with the financial support of the Great Britain) defeated Napoleon.
Works Cited
Duiker, William J., and Speilvogel, Jackson J. The Essential World History. 3rd ed. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth, 2008.
Hunt, Lynn, et al. The Making of the West: Peoples and Cultures, A Concise History. 2nd edition. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2006. Print.
The enlightenment era consisted of quite a number of ideas that changed the French society in addition to growing wave of civilization in the West. This period was characterized by reason during which individuals started to think on their own behalf and were also less dependent in addition to living and working based on set standards and directions. As a result, civilization in the western world started to change socio-political ideologies and values in addition to thinking independently (Sherman & Salisbury 515).
The enlightenment period influenced the French values and ideas in myriad of ways. For instance, political enlightenment ideas made French citizens to overthrown Louis XVI monarch in addition to a government that was representative in nature (Sherman & Salisbury 517).
Moreover, the enlightenment led to popularizing the importance of public debate. This fact enabled individuals to be in position to come up with ideas and discuss the same regarding the government of the day. Consequently, people were in a position to air their views freely and thus in one way or the other influenced the French revolution.
In addition, various writings of French philosophers led to several social developments that resulted into French revolution. For example, the writings of Jean Jacques Rousseau impacted on philosophical “values and ideas that led to the revolution” (Sherman & Salisbury 519).
Rousseau’s idea that men should break away from laws and borders of societal constraints in addition to going back to simple lifestyles in which nature presented to them impacted on the values and ideologies behind revolution. According to Rousseau, man is neither bad nor good compared to other animals due to the fact that he was there prior to revolution. Thus, the writings of Rousseau influenced elements such as architecture, philosophy, values, ideas and tastes during French revolution.
Moreover, certain ideas of Montesquieu, Locke and Voltaire also impacted on the ideas and values of the French revolution. As a matter of fact, Voltaire criticized some of the privileges that were accorded to the noble members of society. On the other hand, Locke and Montesquieu were for perspectives of sovereignty and importance of private property (Sherman & Salisbury (520).
Sherman and Salisbury (519), further underpin that the philosophy of Rousseau made him to write a book on “the social contract” and this work outlines the importance of putting in place a political order that is legitimate in nature. This changed the ideologies and values of the French revolution. Sherman and Salisbury (530) further added that Rousseau pointed out that nature state was a condition that was too primitive and it lacked either morality or law, hence human beings had to embrace the importance of cooperation.
Hence, there was growing need to exercise division of labor as well as designate value to privately owned property as society experienced further growth in terms of socio-economic and political civilization. According to enlightenment ideas, even though human race is dependent in nature, there was still need to “compete with them” (Sherman &Salisbury 530).
Hence, Rousseau pointed out that if human beings can abandon the natural right claims and embracing the social contract, human beings will be in position not only to preserve themselves but also to remain free Sherman and Salisbury (533).
As a result of the aforementioned ideas of the Rousseau, it can be argued that the ideas and values of French revolution were as a result of enlightenment ideas that did not comprise elements of French institutions such as the church doctrine, aristocracy, monarch and feudalism among others (Sherman and Salisbury 533-534). These institutions influenced the revolution since prior to the enlightenment period, individuals had the power to rule people without applying either reason or logic to the best interest of the masses.
The enlightenment further indicated that every citizen had the right to power and respect and these enlightenment principles further impacted on the French revolution ideas and principles. For instance, the established national assembly was based on these principles and it had an aim of representing rights of the people in addition to restoring the nation of France to the people (Sherman & Salisbury (539).
The French revolution transformed political atmosphere in the 18th century. For instance, according to Sherman and Salisbury (540), French revolution resulted into consternation politics that further led into transformation of the existing political culture on ancient regimes. For instance, the revolutionist broke away from the past as a result of competition between the absolute monarch critics and the agents.
As a result of the revolution, individuals came out in open to criticize wanton corruption that was overly prevalent in the monarchy. Furthermore, as a result of French revolution, sovereign state systems came into being as documented by Sherman and Salisbury (541).
Finally, the revolution created a new course of political and socio-economic revolution during 18th century as a result of the enlightenment ideas which resulted into elements such as liberty, equality, improvement in the applied intellectual in the field in politics. These aspects gave politics a new face after the 18th century period.
Work Cited
Sherman, Dennis & Salisbury, Joyce E. The West in the World: From 1600. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2001.
The French Revolution was a major event not only in the history of the French Empire but also in the history of the world. The tumultuous events of the revolution resulted in the spread of ideas of liberty and equality, thereby helping to create a popular movement. This paper aims to discuss social transformations that the revolution sought to achieve.
Discussion
Three Estates
The French Revolution came on the heels of the American Revolution of 1776 (Cole et al. 426). Many subjects of the French Empire were inspired by the success of the American uprising. However, unlike American society that was divided into proponents and opponents of British rule, its French counterpart was characterized by conflicts between many social groups. French society was comprised of three legally-recognized classes that were commonly referred to as Three Estates. Whereas the first two estates consisted of the clergymen and the nobility, the third group subsumed remaining social strata. Interestingly enough, legal distinctions between disparate members of the Third Estate were poorly defined.
The group was comprised of layers, entrepreneurs, laborers, and peasants among others (Cole et al. 427). Wealthy members of the Third Estate were unwilling to identify with manual workers whom they despised. Furthermore, legal distinctions between the nobility and rich entrepreneurs who were jealous of their position resulted in social tensions. Abbe Emmanuel-Joseph Sieyes, a distinguished politician of that time, understood the source of the social discontent and argued that the Third Estate contained “within itself everything needful to constitute a complete nation” (qtd. in Cole et al. 431).
Social Conditions
To better understand the change promised by the uprising, it is necessary to explore the social conditions of the constituents of the Third Estate. Entrepreneurs, lawyers, and other privileged members of the group criticized the government for a complicated tax code. They believed that undue regulations stifled the country’s economy and “interfered with the natural workings of the market” (Cole et al. 428). Peasants also had their fair share of grievances with the state. Residents of the countryside were subject to tithes, levies, fees, rents, and other forms of taxation. In addition to these financial obligations, peasants had to maintain public roads. Also, they were deprived of hunting privileges, which was a major source of discontent.
Before the revolution, the deterioration of economic conditions resulted in the corrosion of social cohesion. In the 1780s, the empire experienced a rapid increase in bread prices, which was caused by poor harvests (Cole et al. 428). Following the law of supply and demand, the production of manufactured goods rapidly decreased, thereby reducing the incomes of wealthy members of the Third Estate.
The Declaration of the Rights of Man
The Declaration of the Rights of Man, which was issued by the National Assembly in 1789, was a perfect example of social transformations that the revolution attempted to achieve (Cole et al. 431). The document was based on the philosophical concept of natural rights and sought to guarantee liberty, freedom of speech, and equality before the law for all citizens of the future republic (Cole et al. 433). Due process of law was an extremely important aim of the French Revolution because, before the uprising, social distinctions between the country’s residents were associated with the unequal application of laws. The Declaration also introduced a concept of religious toleration, which helped to end the persecution of Jews (Cole et al. 432). Furthermore, the document intended to ban slavery in some regions of France, which was an enormous social change.
Women’s Rights
The women’s rights movement around 1790 was another instance of the transformation of French society that was facilitated by the revolution (Cole et al. 432). Even though not all prominent thinkers of the era supported the movement, many women wanted to assert their rights and fought to legalize divorce. Unfortunately, revolutionaries were opposed to the emergence of the political consciousness of French women; therefore, female organizations and clubs were forcefully shut down.
The Church
Another area of the social transformation was the church. The revolutionaries desired to deprive religious authorities of their lands, thereby solving the economic crisis. Moreover, the National Assembly wanted to institutionalize the church and make it free from the political interference of the pope. Unfortunately, this avenue of change was utterly divisive: many peasants who opposed the reform were forced to revolt. Even though revolutionary leaders espoused egalitarian principles, the Committee of Public Safety, which was formed to crack down on the opposition, gave rise to a reign of terror. In the period between 1792 and 1794, the revolutionary progress was drowned in dictatorial bloodshed (Cole et al. 436). Approximately 40, 000 people were murdered in that period (Cole et al. 436).
Conclusion
The paper has shown that the French Revolution was a popular uprising the aim of which was to introduce major social transformations. Despite the substantial progress of the revolutionaries, many peasants and laborers bore the brunt of the tumultuous events. The revolutionary progress was driven not only by the ideas of freedom and equality but also by tyranny and despotism.
The Goguettes, the predecessors of the café-concerts, appeared at the beginning of the eighteenth century. At these places, people were socializing, eating, drinking, and entertaining listening to various ensembles and solo singers. All theaters and musical halls belong to the government at that time, and Goguettes were the only alternative for people to listen to musical concerts and to watch theatrical performances. The themes of the songs before the French Revolution of 1848 and shortly before and during the time of the Paris Commune in 1871 were mostly political and revolutionary. For example, the song “Le Temps des Cerises” that was written in 1866 and is a vivid example of the so-called chanson française or the French song, considered a revolutionary anthem of the Communard movement (Aggarwal).
However, after the Revolution and before the Commune and after the defeat of the Commune, political songs were prohibited, and cabarets were under close supervision. The time between the Revolution and the Commune was the time when the term “café-concert” appeared, and during the “Belle Époque”, they were very popular (Aggarwal).
The Belle Époque
The term “La Belle Époque” is translated from French as “The Beautiful Era” and marks the period from the end of the Franco-Prussian War in 1871 to the beginning of the World War I in 1914. This was a time of the French Third Republic, a period of economic prosperity, regional peace, optimism, consumerism, and scientific, cultural, and technological innovations. At that time, the arts were flourishing, and many masterpieces of theater, music, painting, and literature were created. New forms of entertainment appeared at that time. Among them are the French can-can, café-concerts, and cabarets (Wilde).
After the prohibition of political songs, the main song themes in cabarets became sentimentality and erotica. At that time, women became dominating the stage, and prostitution became one of the main characteristics of the café-concerts. Thus, waitresses, singers, and other female workers sold their services along with their bodies (Wilde).
Even though the café-concerts were situated mostly in working-class areas, a significant part of the visitors was from the upper class, as for the lower class, there were other types of establishments called “beuglants” that is roughly translated as “honkers” and “bouis-bouis” meaning a combination of a small café and brothel (Aggarwal).
At the café-concerts, there were three types of female singers. The first type was pierreuses (streetwalkers) who worked at the lower-class cafés and considered ugly and wore dirty and ragged clothes. The second type was diseuses (speakers) who were singers and actresses and wore modest dresses. The third type was the chanteuses à voix (voice singers) who considered talented singers and often became famous. Among them are Eugénie Buffet, Jeanne Bloch, Thérèsa, and Yvette Guilbert. All three types belong to the working class and held on to their profession, as it gave women a certain degree of freedom and financial stability which was exceptional because women had very limited rights at that time (Wilde).
Chanteuse Réaliste
During the belle époque, café-concerts and cabarets were visited by everyone from the lower to the upper class. But after World War I, their clientele consisted mostly of bourgeois customers. Although the female singers, or as they were called at that time “chanteuses réalistes” performed songs about lower-class women, their difficult lives being prostitutes, and drugs and poverty, the price of their performance was rather high, and the cabarets turned into the music halls where food was not served (Wilde).
Despite having suppressed the movements of the working class, the French bourgeois, especially men came to the music halls in order to appreciate the performance of the popular working-class and remember the revolutionary roots of republicanism in France.
During the interwar period, France was more conservative than before the World War I. The chanteuse réaliste continued to be an important figure for the French identity, but its role began to change (Cordier 22).
The Post-World War II Period
The French Third Republic ceased to exist after its defeat to Nazi Germany in 1940. After World War II, in 1946, the French Fourth Republic was established. At that period, having preserved their popularity, chanteuses réalistes continued to sing about the life of the Parisian lower class and added nostalgic and tragic themes to their repertoire. The music halls were transformed into sound cinemas and movie theaters (Cordier 17).
Edith Piaf
Since the French chanson tradition began to change after the World War II, and more singers, such as Jacques Brel and Charles Aznavour became popular, Edit Piaf is often regarded as the last great chanteuse réaliste, as she was the only one who preserved the initial traditions expressing fatalism and tragedy of the working class. Her singing career began before World War II. In the thirtieths, she also appeared in cameo roles in movies. But the popularity came to her after the war (Huey).
Edith Piaf continued to sing about the nostalgia for Paris of the Belle Époque, café-concerts, and the authenticity of the Parisian working class. The mourning for the French Third Republic was the main theme at that time, as people thought that that time had been “purer” than this when the dominance of the USA caused the appearance of corruption and consumer culture in France; and Edith Piaf when singing about this tragedy on stage was dressed in black and under the white light (Allen).
Edith Piaf had never changed her repertoire up until her death in 1963. For both French and non-French people, Edith Piaf was the embodiment of authentic “Frenchness”, as she remained the last example of the representation of the Belle Époque traditions (Briggs 9).
The French Revolution was a period of political and social instabilities in France, which lasted between 1789 and 1799 (although some historians include Napoleon’s rule in the timeline), and was partially planned and carried out by Napoleon in the course of the French Empire expansion. The timeline of the Revolution can be divided into four stages. The first stage (1788-1792) was characterized by a relatively peaceful and constitutional struggle to achieve societal change (Cole et al. 427).
The elites started articulating their dissatisfaction with the monarchy, which had enforced taxation without representation, despotism, and arbitrary authority. The French elites started developing an Enlightenment-inspired program for changing and rejuvenating French society. It is noteworthy that the king accepted some of the offered reforms while others were enforced without his agreement. However, the peaceful and constitutional period did not last long.
In 1792, the threat of dramatic changes occurring in European countries transformed into war, which consequently put an end to the Bourbon monarchy and laid a foundation for the beginning of the republic. The period between 1792 and 1794 was characterized by repressions and extreme societal and political crisis. The centralized government mobilized its powers and developed the policy of terror, which fought the foreign enemies as well as the French counter-revolutionaries.
Nevertheless, the policy exhausted itself and collapsed in 1794 (Cole et al. 428). In the third stage (1794-1799), the government drifted. France remained a republic and continued its fight with Europe. Weakened by division and corruption, France became prey for Napoleon Bonaparte, an ambitious military leader whose rule marked the end of the revolution. The last period of the French revolution was characterized by Napoleon’s victories and catastrophes.
The causes of the French Revolutions and the attempts to transform the society were vast. First, the society that was predominantly dominated by the elite social groups (aristocrats, officeholders, businessmen, etc.) was deeply inspired by the ideas of the Enlightenment and wanted to overthrow the monarchy. However, it is notable to mention that the Enlightenment did not cause the Revolution, although it significantly changed the public debate (Cole et al. 428). Ideas formulated by Locke, Montesquieu, and Voltaire appealed to both nobles and the middle class. In the countryside, peasants felt the pressure from the landlords, the state, and the church that forced them to pay both direct and indirect taxes.
Overall, the social and economic environment of France significantly deteriorated before the revolution, so there was room for upper and middle classes to offer a new system of government that would allow the economy to grow without the enforcement of substantial limitations on the society. The inefficient system of taxation also contributed to the weakening of France’s financial position, which had an adverse impact on society’s perception of the French government. Issues with the financial position of the country showed weaknesses in the country’s administrative structures and reflected the ineffectiveness of the absolutist monarchy led by Louis XIV.
If to illustrate how the French society wanted to change the existing political, social, and economic structure, the example of the document “Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen” comes to mind. Inspired by the American Declaration of Independence, the document included 16 Articles that proclaimed the rights of French citizens. Among the main ideas were equality of rights, liberty, property, security, and resistance to oppression, the law as an expression of the general will, and so on (Cole et al. 433).
Therefore, the main goal of the French Revolution was to transform the society to create a state and laws that will, first of all, exercise the power of the majority rather than the power of one. The ideas of equality and the right to resist oppression can be applied to any society that values people before governments and rulers. The Revolution managed to politicize the common people that began finding more and more disadvantages of living under the rule of a monarch. Moreover, Louis XVI was weak in his efforts and was considered as “little more than a prisoner of the assembly” (Cole et al. 434).
One of the most significant developments of the French Revolution was the creation of a popular movement characterized by political clubs representing individuals previously excluded from power, common people reading newspapers, and political leaders standing up for the lower classes. The Revolution challenged the moderate leadership and made an attempt to introduce more radical and democratic measures for shifting the orientation of society towards free-thinking and equal treatment.
Nevertheless, the debate about whether the impact of the Revolution exceeded the Napoleonic rule is still ongoing because the attempts of the French to free themselves from an authoritative ruler resulted in Napoleon’s military regime. Nevertheless, the French Revolution marks a period in history when the society wanted to make a shift in the direction of free-thinking and the establishment of equal treatment for all people regardless of their class (Cole et al. 436).
Work Cited
Cole, Joshua, et al. Western Civilizations: Their History and Their Culture. W.W. Norton & Company, 2012.
Maximilien Robespierre influence during the French Revolution
The credibility of the website
The author of this article, Miguel A. Faria holds a very high reputation in the society, and he is very highly educated. He is a professor of surgery and currently is attached to Mercer University as an acting professor who lectures on Clinical History following his retirement from neurosurgery. Furthermore, he is an editor emeritus of the Medical Sentinel, which is a constituent of the Association of American Physics and surgeons [AAPS].
He has written 25 recognized papers on clinical and neurosurgical themes that are contained in the Journal of Neurosurgery and Surgical Neurology. Besides, he also co-authored a considerable number of chapters in the neurosurgery coursebook.
He has cited four sources, of which three of them fall short of credibility; they are intended as public press. Besides, the title of the article does not directly capture the interest of the reader since it approaches the focus of the reader from a broad perspective; The Economic Terror of the French Revolution. It speaks about the element of interest, Maximilien, in association with other revolutionists, such as Jacobins.
The objectivity/subjectivity of the Website
The site has no direct affiliate organization, although the URL ends with the acronym EDU. This indicates that although the website has no recognized affiliate organization, it is concerned with education. Moreover, the author of the article by being a medical professional has inclined more on the adverse perspective of the revolution.
Navigability
The page was just plain without a single hyperlink, and it had no directories at the top. (Home, About us, amongst others). Thus, I think that the site and subsequently the content must be unreliable.
Accuracy
The article gives a generalized viewpoint of Maximilien in the sense that it does not give a detailed description of his role in the French revolution; instead, it attempts to contrast it with that of the American republic. This article does not give tangible evidence of the revolutionist impact on the lives of the French living during this historical era. This article does not address tangible facts about the efforts to revolutionize the French society as outlined in other credible sources such as oxford journals on French history and French history archives.
Although this article was prepared with the aim of enlightening the reader on the impact of revolutionists on the economic and political aspects of the country, it does not meet its major objectives. It does not shed light on the causal factors of the revolution so that the reader would know how to predict any signs of an imminent revolution at any government setting within or outside the country. Also, the article does not highlight any preventive measures of a revolution. The article is dated back to 2003 and relies on unaccredited sources such as the public press.
Summary of the article
This article highlights the shortcomings of Maximilien Robespierre and his affiliate during the French revolution. The revolution depicted the impact of the “scissors strategy of class struggle and warfare at work.” The revolutionist capitalized on fear and absolute terror. Such a scheme was applied by other renowned revolutionists, such as Karl max in the preceding years.
The mechanism for revolution proofed futile in achieving economic parity. The scheme of terror advocated by most of the revolutionists backfired on them besides failing to attain its major objectives. The article shallowly describes the involvement of Robespierre in the revolution. Besides, other persons highlighted in the article include François Babeuf, and he is believed to be a pioneer of the contemporary communist (Faria par 1-15).
The credibility of the website
The author of this article, Historymakers, is a renowned major archival collection of its kind. These organizations deal with human knowledge in a manner that facilitates a reader to understand information for its significance to the world. The objective of this organization is to support knowledge that facilities happiness, welfare, and world serenity.
The objectivity/subjectivity of the Website
The purpose of this article is to disseminate information to readers who are attracted by its credibility. By being a history archive, the information qualifies as valid because they are research-based.
Because of its clear aforementioned objective, the article tends towards being neutral on the topic. It approaches the subject from the general public perspective. It systematically gives the historical events in the life of the character of interest.
Navigability
Essentially, under being a pdf, this article lacks any hyperlinks. However, this does not decrease its credibility. It presents all the information about the revolutionist on a single page. It accurately gives information concerning Maximilien Robespierre.
Accuracy
The article systematically describes the life of Maximilien Robespierre from the time when he was young to the time of his downfall. Besides, the site describes certain important events in the life of the revolutionist. This article gives a detailed account of the life of Maximilien Robespierre and his influence on the French revolution.
Summary of the article
This article gives a detailed account of the reign of Maximilien Robespierre, from the time he took up an office to the time of his downfall. He is portrayed as a passionate supporter of equality, and through his religious inclination, he intended to mold a republic whose citizens dedicated their selves to God.
He was born in 1758 in the city Arras, and he studied and practiced law according to his family’s customs. In 1789 he was elected in Estates-General and started to indulge himself in French Revolution. Although at first, he was soft-spoken, the following year saw him elected president of Jacobin Club, an association which advocated the founding of a republic. He is portrayed as a simple and moral person.
In 1792 he was designated as a representative of Paris, and became an advocate for the Jacobin group, and took part in a controversy that emerged within the national convention. He became a prominent member of the Committee of Public Safety, which helped to evade a civil war and make the French army successful at various wars.
Despite the success of his organization, he was faced with opposition at home. 1975 he embarked on exterminating the opposition groups, such as Hebertists, and the Indulgent. Following the death of Danton, the leader of the Indulgent, Robespierre together with the Committee of Public Safety implemented new strict policies. Cambon, the Superintendent of Finance, revolted against Robespierre and incited a group of other persons who contemplated their execution. Combo and his supporters ganged up against Robespierre, arrested, and executed him. His death was celebrated across the whole country.
Works Cited
Chapter 23. Historymakers: Maximilien Robespierre; master and victim of the terror. In the French Revolution and Napoleon 65. McDougal Littell Inc. n.d. Web.
Faria, Miguel. The Economic Terror of the French Revolution. Article of Interest. 2003. Web.
The French revolution was a period of transition not only in France but as well as much of Europe. It was experienced between 1789 and 1799. This was a period of ten years that saw radical changes not only to the political life of the French people but also the social and economic life. Before the revolution France was ruled by an absolute monarch.
French revolution was first witnessed in the year 1789.in the year 1792 June a number of women demonstrated towards the legislative chambers of the king1. Almost a year later they were demanding for a constitutional change (bread of constitution 1793).many of these women who advocated for these rights were publicly denounced, arrested, executed, and others went for exile. For instance the famous Theroigne de mericourt was deliberately arrested, she was then publicly flogged around the streets and then she was made to spend the rest of her life in an insane asylum.
This led to women practically putting bread on the table, this means that they were catering for the family. Women would march to the nearest government offices when they had nowhere else to get food from. This resulted in women getting tired therefore filing a petition against men which was filed directly to the king.
King of France of the time (Louis xvi) called for elections which other than dealing with financial problems which concerned women dealt with the issue of PARLIAMENT (how voting would take place). Since there were three estates: nobility, clergy, and the commoners, the nobility and the commoners joined to defeat the commoners
All this was caused by women realizing that they could not vote or hold any political office. They had no political rights in the revolutionary kingdom. Secondly they were referred to as inactive only to rely on men for assistance. To some men, a woman was a failed man and was taught only to be a good wife and a good mother2.
These problems led women to take advantage of the volatile political climate to vocalize their principles. They swore oaths of loyalty, declared patriotism and accepted to be responsible citizens. Pauline Leone with her society for revolutionary women was one woman who fought women rights to the bitter end.
When the commoners were defeated women formed clubs. Here many feministic ideas were born. These focused on getting bread for themselves, neighbors, expanding literacy and obtaining female freedom to gain power and also met to learn how to become leaders of a great nation rather than slaves to the husband even if it was a King and a livelong mother to the child. In addition to this the principle of equality of rights within the institution of marriage did extend the rights of widows in cases of property, public training as well as the right to divorce. Additionally it was decided that some professions were to be specifically for women like dressmaking and this was fully implemented3 (Levy et al. 1980).
Moreover some women had aristocratic power. Some of them opened intellectual saloons where debates would be held. A good example of this is Suzanne Necker.
However after women being incorporated in the government war broke out and they were ready to fight for their country with weapons other than needle and spindle. The government was against this and women were banned from the army.
Bibliography
Jack, Censer, and Hunt Lynn. Liberty, Equality, Fraternity: Exploring the French Revolution. Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2001.
Levy,Darlene and others, Women in Revolutionary Paris 1789 – 1795: Selected Documents Translated with Notes and Commentary. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1980.
Kennedy, Emmet. A Cultural History of the French Revolution. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989.
Footnotes
Censer jack and Lynn Hunt, Liberty, Equality, Fraternity: Exploring the French Revolution(Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2001) , 13-18.
Kennedy Emmet, A Cultural History of the French Revolution (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989).
Darlene Levy and others, Women in Revolutionary Paris 1789 – 1795: Selected Documents Translated with Notes and Commentary, (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1980).