Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
how marie antoinette might have caused the french revolution
how marie antoinette might have caused the french revolution
how marie antoinette might have caused the french revolution
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The French Revolution was a period of radical change of political, economic, and social structure in France in the eighteenth century. During this period, King Louis XVI and Queen Marie-Antoinette were in power, but soon were beheaded by the infamous guillotine during the overthrowing of the French monarchy. This was caused by their neglect to address the agrarian distress between the middle class and peasants in France, the lack of trust between the French and their monarchy due to Queen Marie-Antoinette’s suspicious correspondences with Austria, and the sheer and absolute hatred that the French had for the Austrian Empire in which Queen Marie-Antoinette was born in. The French Revolution was brought about from many reasons, one of these …show more content…
As Austrophobic feelings increased, the French people’s desire to dethrone Queen Marie-Antoinette grew extremely strong. Many people who supported the execution via guillotine of King Louis XVI agreed that Queen Marie-Antoinette should also be executed on the same day (Kaiser, 596). This did not occur, because the French hoped that in prolonging her life they could somehow reach a negotiation with Austria and use her for part of it. This adversely made the French even more hateful towards Queen Marie-Antoinette because they believed that even if she was imprisoned, “the former queen was plotting to mobilize foreign forces against the Revolution” (Kaiser, 597). The utter fear the French had of their Austrian descended Queen led to her nickname as “The Austrian …show more content…
Edmund Burke was criticized by stating that the Queen fled her dwelling “en deshabille” (Blakemore, 514) which means nearly naked. Although there were several occurrences where people may have broken into the Queen’s dwellings, there was no physical proof of her running out of her room in less than acceptable attire. This shows how determined the French were to diminish the reputation of the Queen, even if it went as far as being almost satirical. Another great rumor during the time was that a “mob, frustrated that they could not find the queen, ‘pierced the mattress with pikes and committed other indignities’” (Blakemore, 520). Even though these things have next to no evidence, the mere fact that the French would go to the lengths to make up such elaborate and extreme stories that could possibly incriminate those mentioned in it if ‘witnesses’ said that the accounts were true, shows how much the French despised the Queen. This sheer amount of hatred towards the Queen and her Austrian heritage was the backbone to her demise and how Queen Marie-Antoinette lost her
King Louis nation had a massive reaction focused on the King’s plight and return. The Reaction was not only seen in Paris alone but also on the other provinces, where a widespread phobia caused by foreign invasion led to the utter news of the King’s escape. Nevertheless, Tackett identifies the royal family plight to flee France as one of the most critical moments in the history of the French revolution. The king’s flight opens a window to the whole of the French society during the revolution. The purpose of the Kings flight was to offer freedom of action in terms of power and this was in regards to the King’s power and rule. The royal couple together with their advisers had unclear political agenda for their nation. Similarly, it is in the vent of these unclear goals factored by the Kind’s technical knowhow of not making decisive decisions that led to the stoppage of the royal family at Varennes and thereafter their return to Paris. The consequence of their return to Paris was the onset of the constant possibility of the end of the Monarch reign. On the same case, it is as a result of the royal family escape attempt and failure necessitated the integrity of the King as a constitutional monarch. On a much more political notion, The King’s hope of survival is mitigated
...ult to choose her growing environment, and also she was influenced by Louis XVI, as I mentioned above. Marie Antoinette was just viewed as a traitor, because she support Austria instead. She will definitely support her brother, because he was her family. French people couldn't forgave her. After she married, she need time to get use to her new life, but her husband didn't stop her to spend that much money, because he himself did that too, so their behaviors slowly became a cause of French Revolution.
The French Revolution was a period of political upheaval that occurred in France during the latter half of the 18th century. This revolution marked an end to the system of feudalism and the monarchy in France and a rise to democracy and new Enlightenment ideas. By 1789, when the revolution began, France was in a deep financial crisis due to the debt they had obtained over many years of reckless spending and France was nearly bankrupt. These financial issues fell almost completely on the bottom social class or the Third Estate which made up a majority of the country. Because of this financial trouble the common people were heavily taxed leaving many of them in poverty. In addition to the economic issues, France also held an Estate System that led to heavy
The French Revolution, beginning in 1789, was a lengthy process in which the people of France took over the government and instituted a Republic (Chambers). The overarching goal of the Revolution was to place the power of government in the hands of the people. For two years, whilst France was facing internal disorganization and external wartime threats, the government was run by a war dictatorship under Maximilien Robespierre, the head of the Committee of Public Safety (“Reign of Terror”). Amid much internal suspicion and fear, the Reign of Terror began. Much of France was politically divided, and Robespierre’s method for keeping the government stable in a time of crisis involved severe penalties for any suspected of plotting against the new government (Chambers). Soon the accusations began to fly and a handful of people convicted and killed for treason became thousands. Many of the cases turned into the accuser’s word versus the accused, and a government preoccupied with bigger issues often did not care to look into these cases, simply convicting the accused, supposedly to promote a sense of unity and control to the citizens of France, and to forewarn anyone who did attempt treasonous deeds (Chambers). Eventually, Marie Antoinette, guilty of no crime other than marrying the former king, was executed on the grounds of treason (“French Revolution: The Reign of Terror”). Many thought this was taking a step too far. The former Queen was well-respec...
Catherine de Medici’s culpability for the turbulent events in France in 1559-72 remains a topic of some debate. Highly personal protestant pamphleteers associated Catherine with sinister comparisons to the contemporary evil Machiavelli which eventually developed into the ‘Black Legend’. Jean.H. Mariégol consolidates this interpretation, overwhelmingly assuming Catherine’s wickedness; the Queen Mother was deemed to be acting for ‘personal aggrandizement’ without an interest in the monarchy. Neale provides a corrective arguing a ‘dominant maternalism’ drove Catherine’s policies. Sutherland critiques Neale, suggesting he is guilty of using misconceived qualifying phrases from the ‘Black Legend’ stemming from the contemporary pamphlets, instead Sutherland and Heller attempt to disentangle Catherine from the context of the xenophobic Protestant pamphleteers that shaped much of Catherine’s historical analysis thus far, revealing the ‘politique’ whose moderate policies were a force for stability. Knecht is most convincing in his assertion that whilst the ‘Black Legend’ is a misrepresentation of her character and policies, Sutherland goes too far in whitewashing Catherine. Ironically, Catherine as a ‘politique’ aimed for complex policies and yet her role in French politics was over-simplified by contemporaries and arguably even by modern historians contributing to overly polarised interpretations. Instead we should bear in mind the violent pressures Catherine faced in the context of the collapse of monarchical authority and follow the more nuanced interpretation of her role.
Lasting from 1789 to 1799, the French Revolution led a major turning point in the history of France. Ten years were filled with bloodshed, war, and terror. One of the results of the revolution was the overthrow of the monarchy, Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette. Marie Antoinette is considered the most infamous and despised person in French history; however, not many know her life story.
Before her execution, Charlotte Corday stated that, “There are so few patriots who know how to die for their country” (GPS Faculty). This woman truly believed that if one is to be truly dedicated to their country, self-sacrifice is an inescapable deed. Although this frame of mind today is considered highly respectable, if not righteous, in Corday’s time her well-meaning actions were not appreciated by the French people. In eighteenth century France, honor was not so much based on one’s actions, but on their birth and status in society. Honor could be bought; the more money one had the more honorable they were assumed to be. Education also determined the level of honor; people assumed that an educated individual must have a clear knowledge of right and wrong. For this reason, the man Charlotte Corday murdered, Jean-Paul Marat, was loved by the majority of the French public. Marat had plenty of money, was very well educated and was wonderful with oratory. However, he instilled violence within the French people and Corday believed th...
King Louis attempted to escape, but was quickly captured, taken back to paris, and was tried and executed for crimes against the people. Louis XIV, executed in 1793, was the last Bourbon king of france. Nine months later, his wife was executed. His wife was Marie Antoinette, an Austrian. She married king louis XIV when she was only fifteen years old and had a tough time being queen ever since she got married. She Was blamed for the country going downhill, and she had to live under the supervision of the revolutionary once they took over. In 1793 her husband was executed, and nine month later, so was
Marie Antoinette Josèphe Jeanne de Habsbourg-Lorraine was born in the mid-eighteenth century as an archduchess and princess, to Maria Teresa, the Austrian Empress, at the very apex of the European hierarchal pyramid. She was an essential part to the oldest royal European house, as it became known that her sole duty in life was to unite the two great powers and long-term enemies of Austria-Hungary and France by marriage. She was brutally overthrown by her own starving people and portrayed to the world as a villain and abuser of power, whereas sympathy for the young queen should be shown.
The revolution emphasized the ideals of “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity” and was characterized by the strong will of the French people who stood up for what they believed in. It was also an extremely bloody time, which saw the rise of the guillotine, a contraption used for public executions and to instill a sense of fear in those opposed to the revolution. The revolution saw the public execution of the King and Queen, Louis XIV and Marie Antoinette as well as thousands of others. The upper class feared for their lives.
Marie-Antoinette tried to fix the rapidly deteriorating position of the crown by having secret negotiations with Antoine Barnave, who was the leader of the constitutional monarchist section in the National Assembly.19 Barnave was the one who managed to coax Louis to sign the new constitution of France in 1791.20 But Marie undermined his position by trying to break off the revolution by secretly bringing her brother Leopold II into things.21 She encouraged him towards military intervention in French affairs, leading to a manifesto with Austria and Prussia promising to help the French monarchy in 1791.22 After the French people declared war on Austria in 1792 because of fears of invasion,23 Marie and Louis sided with Austria because they hoped it would crush the revolutionary forces and ideas of the people.24 But none of this helped because the royal family was involved with events too far out of their control. The people absolutely hated that she was supporting her brother’s invasion of France, rather than helping the French. The “Let them eat cake” rumor did not help her either, because it was helping fuel the people’s hatred of her by showing off her ignorance to how her people felt. There was also a thief who posed as Marie in 178525 who stole a 647-diamond necklace and it was taken to London to be sold in England.26 She was found to be not
Jean Plaidy and John Russell are both Historians who opposed the idea of Marie Antoinette having any responsibility in the invoking nor the starting of the French Revolution. Plaidy and Russell both state that the Dauphin’s only duty to France and her people was to simply bore the country an heir to continue the reign of the Bourbon Dynasty. Thus, the Dauphine’s duties were not to foresee the country’s affairs, organise and implement laws nor take part in government relations, accordingly, Marie Antoinette was not responsible for the French Revolution because firstly, she eventually bore the country and heir and fulfilled her duties and secondly, the country’s affairs such as the laws and how the government operated were never her responsibilities,
During the eighteenth century, France was one of the most richest and prosperous countries in Europe, but many of the peasants were not happy with the way France was being ruled. On July 14, 1789, peasants and soldiers stormed the Bastille and initiated the French Revolution. This essay will analyze the main causes of the French Revolution, specifically, the ineffectiveness of King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette, the dissatisfaction of the Third Estate, and the Enlightenment. It will also be argued that the most significant factor that caused the French Revolution is the ineffective leadership of King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette.
Through the use of two main characters in the film, Queen Margot, a critical examination will be made to further understand the importance of developing characters and their respected standard historical interpretations. By heavily characterizing the protagonist, Margaret of Valois, audience members were given the ability to identify with her. Similarly, the Queen regent, Catherine de Medici remained heavily mythologized in the film to advance the plotline. The overall success of the film can thereby be attributed to the prominence of the representation of historical figures.
There was often a danger posed from being the King's favorite, oppositions could lead to trouble for the Mistress, and Madame de Pompadour experienced her fair share of opposition and resentment. According to Thomas Kaiser one of the main oppositions that Pompadour encountered was that of the queen's party, or parti...